The Role of the Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy on Penile Rehabilitation After Radical Prostatectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BackgroundErectile dysfunction (ED) after radical prostatectomy (RP) still represents a major issue. Considering the benefits recently described regarding the application of low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LiESWT) in vasculogenic ED, questions arise about its role in the scenario of penile rehabilitation.AimTo compare the early introduction of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE5i) with a combination therapy enrolling both early PDE5i use and LiESWT in patients submitted to RP.MethodsThis study is a randomized clinical trial, open-label, with 2 parallel arms and an allocation ratio of 1:1. The study was registered in ReBEC (ensaiosclinicos.gov.br) Trial: RBR-85HGCG. Both arms started tadalafil at a dose of 5 mg/day right after the removal of the transurethral catheter, and the experimental group received 2,400 shocks/session-week distributed on 4 different penile regions. The full treatment consisted of 19,200 impulses across 8 weeks.OutcomesThe primary clincal end point was ≥4-point difference favoring the experimental group considering the mean International Index of Erectile Function short form (IIEF-5) at last follow-up. Any statistical difference in the IIEF-5 score between the arms was stated as the primary statistical end point.ResultsBetween September 25, 2017, and December 3, 2018, 92 men were enrolled in the study. At last follow-up, we assessed 77 patients, 41 in the control group and 36 in the intervention group. A difference between groups was detected when accessing the final median IIEF-5 score (12.0 vs 10.0; P = .006). However, the primary clinical endpoint considering a difference ≥4-point between the arms has not been reached. When performing an exploratory analysis comparing the proportion of those individuals with an IIEF-5 score ≥17, no difference between groups was noted (17.1% vs 22.2%; P = .57).Clinical ImplicationsSo far, the benefits arising from LiESWT for penile rehabilitation after RP have been uncertain.Strengths & LimitationsThis is the first trial assessing the role of LiESWT on erectile function after RP. Our study protocol included only one session per week for the experimental group, raising a query if a more intensive application could achieve better results once a statistically significant difference was found between groups. We discontinue the PDE5i use at the last session, which may have interfered in the penile vascular rehabilitation, maybe compromising the results too.ConclusionAfter therapy with 19,200 impulses therapy across 8 weeks, we found an improvement of the IIEF-5 score, but it was not enough to be considered clinically significant. More studies are warranted before any recommendation on this topic.Baccaglini W, Pazeto CL, Corrêa Barros EA, et al. The Role of the Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy on Penile Rehabilitation After Radical Prostatectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Sex Med 2020;17:688–694.     

Survey on the Contemporary Management of Intraoperative Urethral Injuries During Penile Prosthesis Implantation

Background

Intraoperative urethral injury is an uncommon event during the placement of a penile prosthesis, and alternative management strategies have been proposed with continuation of implantation after urethral injury.

Spontaneous Penile Tumescence by Sparing Cavernous Tissue in the Course of Malleable Penile Prosthesis Implantation

Introduction

Spontaneous penile tumescence after penile prosthesis implantation has been sporadically reported in the literature.

Impact of Pelvic Radiation Therapy on Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Reoperation Rates

Introduction

Considering that radiation therapy (RT) compromises soft tissue microvasculature, impairs wound healing, and causes cavernosal fibrosis, inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) outcomes may be adversely affected in men treated with RT.

Inflatable Penile Prosthesis in the Ambulatory Surgical Setting: Outcomes From a Large Urological Group Practice

BackgroundThe definitive treatment for erectile dysfunction is the surgical implantation of a penile prosthesis, of which the most common type is the 3-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) device. IPP surgery in outpatient freestanding ambulatory surgical centers (ASC) is becoming more prevalent as payers and health systems alike look to reduce healthcare costs.AimTo evaluate IPP surgical outcomes in an ASC as compared to contemporaneously-performed hospital surgeries.MethodsA database of all patients undergoing IPP implantation by practitioners in the largest private community urology group practice in the United States, from January 1, 2013 to August 1, 2019, was prospectively compiled and retrospectively reviewed. Cohorts of patients having IPP implantation performed in the hospital vs ASC setting were compared.Main Outcome MeasureThe primary outcome measure was to compare surgical data (procedural and surgical times, need for hospital transfer from ASC) and outcomes (risk for device infection, erosion, and need for surgical revision) between ASC and hospital-based surgery groups.ResultsA total of 923 patients were included for this analysis, with 674 (73%) having ASC-based surgery and 249 (27%) hospital-based, by a total of 33 surgeons. Median procedural (99.5 vs 120 minutes, P < .001) and surgical (68 vs 75 minutes, P < .001) times were significantly shorter in the ASC. While the risk for device erosion and need for surgical revision were similar between groups, there was no higher risk for prosthetic infection when surgery was performed in the ASC (1.7% vs 4.4% [hospital], P = .02), corroborated by logistic regression analysis (odds ratio 0.39, P = .03). The risk for postoperative transfer of an ASC patient to the hospital was low (0.45%). The primary reason for mandated hospital-based surgery was medical (51.4%), though requirement as a result of insurance directive (39.7%) was substantial.Clinical ImplicationsIPP implantation in the ASC is safe, has similar outcomes compared to hospital-based surgery with a low risk for need for subsequent hospital transfer.Strengths & LimitationsThe strengths of this study include the large patient population in this analysis as well as the real-world nature of our practice. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the review as well as the potential for residual confounding.ConclusionASC-based IPP implantation is safe, with shorter surgical and procedural times compared to those cases performed in the hospital setting, with similar functional outcomes. These data suggest no added benefit to hospital-based surgery in terms of prosthetic infection risk.Weinberg AC, Siegelbaum MH, Lerner BD, et al. Inflatable Penile Prosthesis in the Ambulatory Surgical Setting: Outcomes From a Large Urological Group Practice. J Sex Med 2020;17:1025–1032.     

Three-Piece Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Placement Following Pelvic Radiation: Technical Considerations and Contemporary Outcomes

Background

Pelvic radiation is a known risk factor for the development and progression of erectile dysfunction. When medical therapy fails, the 3-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) can offer patients a definitive treatment option. Because of radiation-induced vascular changes and tissue fibrosis, a careful surgical approach is necessary to avoid intraoperative complications and attain successful outcomes. Despite its widespread use in prostate cancer treatment, there are no contemporary studies examining the effects that pelvic radiation can have on 3-piece IPP placement and device survival.

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to Increase Adherence to Penile Injection Therapy-Based Rehabilitation After Radical Prostatectomy: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

IntroductionDespite the importance of using penile injections as part of a penile rehabilitation program, men have difficulty complying with these programs.AimTo test a novel psychological intervention based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for erectile dysfunction (ACT-ED) to help men utilize penile injections.MethodsThis pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) recruited men who were beginning a standard care (SC) structured penile rehabilitation program following radical prostatectomy. The SC program instructed patients to use penile injections 2 to 3 times per week. Participants were randomized to SC+ACT-ED or SC+enhanced monitoring (EM). Over 4 months, patients in the SC+ACT-ED group received SC plus 4 ACT sessions and 3 ACT phone calls; those in the EM group received SC plus 7 phone calls from an experienced sexual medicine nurse practitioner. Participants were assessed at study entry and at 4 and 8 months. For this pilot study, the goal was to determine initial efficacy (ie, effect sizes, where d = 0.2 is small, d = 0.5 is medium, and d = 0.8 is large).Main Outcome MeasurePrimary outcomes were feasibility and use of penile injections. Secondary outcomes were ED treatment satisfaction (ie, Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction, or EDITS), sexual Self-Esteem and Relationship (SEAR) quality, sexual bother (SB), and prostate cancer treatment regret.ResultsThe 53 participants were randomized (ACT, n = 26; EM, n = 27). The study acceptance rate was 61%. At 4 months, the ACT-ED group utilized more penile injections per week (1.7) compared to the EM group (0.9) (d = 1.25; P = .001) and was more adherent to penile rehabilitation compared to the EM group (ACT, 44%; EM, 10%; relative risk [RR], 4.4; P = .02). These gains were maintained at 8 months for injections per week (ACT, 1.2; EM, 0.7; d = 1.08; P = .03) and approached significance for adherence (ACT, 18%; EM, 0%; P = .10). At 4 months, ACT-ED, compared to EM, reported moderate effects for greater satisfaction with ED treatment (d = 0.41; P = .22), greater sexual self-esteem (d = 0.54; P = .07) and sexual confidence (d = 0.48; P = .07), lower sexual bother (d = 0.43; P = .17), and lower prostate cancer treatment regret (d = 0.74; P = .02). At 8 months, moderate effects in favor of ACT-ED were maintained for greater sexual self-esteem (d = 0.40; P = .19) and less treatment regret (d = 0.47; P = .16).Clinical ImplicationsACT concepts may help men utilize penile injections and cope with the effects of ED.Strengths and LimitationsStrengths include use of an innovative intervention utilizing ACT concepts and pilot RCT. Limitations include the pilot nature of the study (eg, small samples size, lack of statistical power).ConclusionACT-ED is feasible and significantly increases the use of penile injections. ACT-ED also shows promise (moderate effects) for increasing satisfaction with penile injections and sexual self-esteem while decreasing sexual bother and prostate cancer treatment regret.Nelson CJ, Saracino RM, Napolitano S, et al. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to Increase Adherence to Penile Injection Therapy-Based Rehabilitation After Radical Prostatectomy: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. J Sex Med 2019; 19:1398–1408.     

Sexual Rehabilitation After Nerve-Sparing Radical Prostatectomy: Free-of-Charge Phosphodiesterase Type 5 Inhibitor Administration Improves Compliance to Treatment

Background

In December 2006, the region of Tuscany (Italy) authorized the free-of-charge provision of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5I) for all patients with Tuscan citizenship who undergo nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (NSRP).

Decrease in Intercourse Satisfaction in Men Who Recover Erections After Radical Prostatectomy

Introduction

Recovery of erections after radical prostatectomy (RP) is assumed to lead to recovery in sexual satisfaction. Although data suggest a relationship between sexual function and sexual satisfaction, it is unclear whether presurgical levels of sexual satisfaction are attained for men who “recover” erections post-RP.

Penile Rehabilitation Therapy Following Radical Prostatectomy: A Meta-Analysis

BackgroundPenile rehabilitation, defined as the use of any drug or device at or after radical prostatectomy to maximize erectile function recovery, is commonly used for post-prostatectomy erectile dysfunction; however, conflicting results based on each study make it difficult to give a recommendation for clinical practice.AimTo clarify the effect of oral phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5is), vacuum erection devices, intracorporeal injection therapy, and the combination of these treatments on penile rehabilitation.MethodsA comprehensive publication search was done through the PubMed and Embase databases up to February 8, 2017. The reference lists of the retrieved studies also were investigated. Data were analyzed using STATA 12.0. A fixed- or random-effects model was used to calculate the overall combined odds ratio (OR) or standard mean differences (SMDs). Publication bias was assessed using the Begg and Egger tests.OutcomesChange in sexual function before and after treatment.ResultsAfter screening, 11 randomized controlled trials and 5 case-control studies were included. The overall meta-analysis showed that penile rehabilitation with PDE5is, vacuum erection devices, and intracorporeal injection significantly increased the number of patients with erectile function improvement (OR = 2.800, 95% CI = 1.932–4.059, P = .000) and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) score (SMD = 5.896, 95% CI = 4.032–7.760, P = .000). In subgroup analysis based on study design, randomized controlled trials and case-control studies showed that penile rehabilitation increased the number of patients with erectile function improvement (randomized controlled trials: OR = 2.154, 95% CI = 1.600–2.895, P = .000; case-control studies: OR = 2.800, 95% CI = 1.932–4.059, P = .000). Subgroup analysis for PDE5i treatment also only demonstrated an increased patient response rate (OR = 2.161, 95% CI = 1.675–2.788, P = .000) and IIEF scores (SMD = 0.922, 95% CI = 0.545–1.300, P = .000). However, after PDE5i washout, there was no improvement of spontaneous erectile function (OR = 1.027, 95% CI = 0.713–1.478, P = .610).Clinical TranslationThis study provides information about the efficacy of penile rehabilitation that can help clinicians decide treatment strategies.Strengths and LimitationsThis meta-analysis has higher statistical power than each study. Preoperative patient characteristics, various treatment methods, and different follow-up times might bring bias to pooled effects.ConclusionOur meta-analysis confirmed that administration of PDE5is, vacuum erection devices, and intracorporeal injection after radical prostatectomy can increase erection function during treatments. However, current evidence does not support that penile rehabilitation with PDE5is can improve recovery of spontaneous erectile function. Further studies with adequate follow-up and larger samples should be conducted to generate a comprehensive conclusion.Liu C, Lopez DS, Chen M, Wang R. Penile Rehabilitation Therapy Following Radical Prostatectomy: A Meta-Analysis. J Sex Med 2017;14:1496–1503.     

Development of Nomograms to Predict the Recovery of Erectile Function Following Radical Prostatectomy

IntroductionGiven the number of confounders in predicting erectile function recovery after radical prostatectomy (RP), a nomogram predicting the chance to be functional after RP would be useful to patients’ and clinicians’ discussions.AimTo develop preoperative and postoperative nomograms to aid in the prediction of erectile function recovery after RP.Main Outcome MeasuresInternational Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) erectile function domain score-based erectile function.MethodsA prospective quality-of-life database was used to develop a series of nomograms using multivariable ordinal logistic regression models. Standard preoperative and postoperative factors were included.Main Outcome MeasuresThe nomograms predicted the probability of recovering functional erections (erectile function domain scores ≥24) and severe erectile dysfunction (≤10) 2 years after RP.Results3 nomograms have been developed, including a preoperative, an early postoperative, and a 12-month postoperative version. The concordance indexes for all 3 exceeded 0.78, and the calibration was good.Clinical ImplicationsThese nomograms may aid clinicians in discussing erectile function recovery with patients undergoing RP.Strengths & LimitationsStrengths of this study included a large population, validated instrument, nerve-sparing grading, and nomograms that are well calibrated with excellent discrimination ability. Limitations include current absence of external validation and an overall low comorbidity index.ConclusionsIt is hoped that these nomograms will allow for a more accurate discussion between patients and clinicians regarding erectile function recovery after RP.Mulhall JP, Kattan MW, Bennett NE, et al. Development of Nomograms to Predict the Recovery of Erectile Function Following Radical Prostatectomy J Sex Med 2019;16:1796–1802.     

Distinguishing Failure to Cure From Complication After Penile Prosthesis Implantation

BackgroundA successful penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) surgery can be defined by outcomes beyond the absence of complications.AimTo introduce the concept of failure to cure (FTC) in the context of PPI to more accurately gauge postoperative outcomes after PPI.MethodsConsecutive patients from our sexual function registry who underwent PPI from January 2011 to December 2013 were analyzed. Demographics, previous treatment of erectile dysfunction, comorbidities, social history, postoperative problems (POPs), and surgical outcomes were tabulated. Patients completed the International Index of Erection Function (IIEF) and the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction questionnaires. We defined a complication, according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, as any deviation from the ideal postoperative course that is not inherent in the procedure and does not constitute an FTC. FTC was defined as a POP that was not a complication. The χ² tests, t-tests, or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used.OutcomesPatient-reported and objective outcomes after PPI.ResultsOur enrollment consisted of 185 patients, and we contacted 124 (67%). Of these, 16 (12.9%) had a POP requiring reoperation. Eight patients developed surgical complications (three infections, four erosions, and one chronic pain). Eight patients had FTC (four malpositions and four malfunctions). Factors that correlated with POPs were previous PPI, body mass index higher than 30 kg/m², and previous treatment with intracorporal injections (P < .05 for all comparisons). Patients who had POPs scored significantly lower on the IIEF erectile function and intercourse satisfaction domains (P < .05 for the two comparisons), but not on the orgasmic function, sexual desire, and overall satisfaction domains (P > .05 for all comparisons).Clinical ImplicationsPOPs after PPI surgery can be more accurately categorized using the Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications to more clearly distinguish surgical complications from FTC.Strengths and LimitationsLimitations of our study include its retrospective approach. Our series included a large proportion of patients treated for prostate cancer, which limits the generalizability of our findings. We also had a relatively short median follow-up time of 27 months.ConclusionsPatient-reported outcome assessments can vary greatly from what physicians determine to be successful PPI. An assessment of POPs encompasses more than just complication rates; it also reflects FTC. Even when POPs occur, patients can still derive satisfaction if they are correctively managed. Factors that possibly predispose to POPs include previous PPI surgery, body mass index greater than 30 kg/m², and history of intracorporal injections.Pineda M, Burnett AL. Distinguishing Failure to Cure From Complication After Penile Prosthesis Implantation. J Sex Med 2017;14:731–737.     

Exploring the Optimal Erectile Function Domain Score Cutoff That Defines Sexual Satisfaction After Radical Prostatectomy

IntroductionThe International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) is the gold standard validated instrument for defining erectile function (EF) and its response to treatment. The EF domain (EFD) contains six questions and is a sensitive and specific measurement of treatment-related changes in EF. The EFD score has been widely used as a primary assessment end point for clinical trials of EF recovery after radical prostatectomy (RP). Various EFD scores have been used to define functional erections. Recently, an EFD score of at least 22 has been used as a threshold in major post-RP penile rehabilitation studies.AimTo define the EFD score that optimally defines “functional” erections after RP.MethodsWe assessed men 24 months after RP using the IIEF and specifically analyzed the scores of the EFD and intercourse satisfaction domain (ISD).Main Outcome MeasuresWe used two questions on satisfaction (score = 0–5) and enjoyment (score = 0–5) from the ISD to classify IS (score = 0–10). We tested the following intercourse satisfaction classifications: ISD score equal to 10, ISD score of at least 8, and a score of at least 4 for the ISD questions on satisfaction and enjoyment. We used the classification that produced the largest area under the curve (AUC) using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Then, we used a three-step process to determine the optimal EFD score cutoff using sensitivity and specificity analysis.ResultsOne hundred seventy-eight men had an average age at RP of 58 ± 7 years and a 24-month EFD score of 20 ± 9. Sixty-four percent had complete nerve-sparing surgery, 35% had partial nerve-sparing surgery, and 1% had the nerves fully resected. Thirty-three percent had laparoscopic RP and 67% had open RP. The ROC curves produced AUCs of 0.80 (ISD score = 10), 0.85 (ISD score ≥ 8), and 0.86 (ISD scores for satisfaction and enjoyment ≥ 4; P < .001 for all comparisons). Using the IS criterion of ISD scores for satisfaction and enjoyment of at least 4 (largest AUC), the sensitivity and specificity values were 0.89 and 0.66 for an ESD score equal to 22, 0.78 and 0.71 for a score equal to 23, 0.78 and 0.80 for a score equal to 24, 0.77 and 0.82 for a score equal to 25, and 0.73 and 0.85 for a score equal to 26. The scores of 24 and 25 met the criteria outlined in the first two steps of analysis. The score of 24 was selected as the cutoff using face valid judgment and the previous literature.ConclusionThese data support an EFD score of 24 as a valid cutoff defining “functional” erection in men with erectile dysfunction after RP. These data are important for clinicians in counseling patients and to researchers to define inclusion criteria and treatment end points for trials of erectile dysfunction after RP.Terrier JE, Muhall JP, Nelson CJ. Exploring the Optimal Erectile Function Domain Score Cutoff That Defines Sexual Satisfaction After Radical Prostatectomy. J Sex Med 2017;14:804–809.     

Impact of Index Surgical Care Setting on Perioperative Outcomes and Cost Following Penile Prosthesis Surgery

BackgroundPenile prosthesis surgery has witnessed a migration from the inpatient to ambulatory surgical care setting. However, little is known about the cost savings afforded by this change in care setting and whether or not these savings come at the expense of worse perioperative outcomes.AimThe aim of this study was to identify predictors of index penile prosthesis (PP) surgery care setting, and whether ambulatory vs inpatient surgery is associated with comparable perioperative outcomes and costs.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study using all-payer claims data from the 2014 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Databases from Florida and New York. Patient demographics, regional data, total charges (converted to costs), and 30-day revisit rates were abstracted for all patients undergoing index placement of an inflatable or malleable PP. Multivariable logistic and linear regression adjusted for facility clustering was utilized.OutcomesThe outcomes were index surgical and 30-day postoperative costs, as well as 30-day revisit rates.ResultsOf the 1,790 patients undergoing an index surgery, 394 (22.0%) received care in the inpatient setting compared to 1,396 (78.0%) in the ambulatory setting. Adjusted index procedural ($9,319.66 vs $ 10,191.35; P < .001) and 30-day acute care costs ($9,461.74 vs $10,159.42; P < .001) were lower in the ambulatory setting. The underinsured experienced lower odds of receiving surgery in the ambulatory setting (Medicaid vs private: odds ratio [OR] 0.19; 95% CI 0.06?0.55; P < .001). There was no difference in risk-adjusted odds of experiencing a 30-day revisit between patients undergoing surgery in the ambulatory vs inpatient settings (OR 1.31; 95% CI 0.78?2.21; P = .3).Clinical TranslationAmbulatory PP surgery confers significant cost savings and is associated with comparable perioperative outcomes relative to inpatient-based surgery.ConclusionsBoth clinical and nonclinical factors predict the care setting of index PP surgery. Notably, underinsured patients experienced lower odds of undergoing ambulatory surgery. Ambulatory surgery was less costly with similar 30-day revisit rates relative to inpatient-based care.Berger A, Friedlander DF, Herzog P, et al. Impact of Index Surgical Care Setting on Perioperative Outcomes and Cost Following Penile Prosthesis Surgery. J Sex Med 2019;16:1451–1458.     

The Absence of a Validated English-Language Survey to Assess Prosthesis Satisfaction: A Prospective Cohort Using the Sexual Quality of Life After Penile Prosthesis

BackgroundPrior assessments of sexual quality of life (SQoL) after penile prosthesis implantation have been performed without validated implant-specific tools. The Quality of Life and Sexuality with Penile Prosthesis (QoLSPP) questionnaire was designed and validated in Italian to specifically evaluate SQoL after a penile prosthesis is placed.AimWe aim to better characterize prosthesis-specific SQoL after inflatable penile prosthesis placement using the English translation of the QoLSPP questionnaire.MethodsA total of 395 consecutive patients received an inflatable penile prosthesis between January 1, 2009 and November 27, 2017, and 270 had functional emails to whom the QoLSPP questionnaire was sent. 90 surveys were completed by 75 first-time implantees and 15 patients who underwent removal/replacement surgery. Responses were considered positive if ≥ 3. Among first-time implantees, subpopulation analysis was carried out by age at survey completion (<55 years, 55–65 years, and ≥66 years), age of penile prosthesis at survey completion (<1 year, 1–5 years, and >5 years), device model (Coloplast Titan, AMS 700 CX, and AMS LGX), history of a psychiatric diagnosis, etiology of erectile dysfunction, total device length > or ≤ 21 cm, diabetes status, and body mass index < /≥ 30. Responses were analyzed in R using t-tests for continuous variables and Chi-squared tests (Fisher's for small counts) for categorical variables.OutcomesThe main outcome measure of this study was sexual quality of life assessed by QoLSPP.ResultsPatients completed the survey on average 3.15 years from their most recent prosthesis placement. 84% of first-time implantees had positive responses. Among them, there were no significant differences in the proportion of positive responses by device type, age, history of a psychiatric diagnosis, total implanted device length, etiology of erectile dysfunction, diabetes, or body mass index statuses (all P > .05). There was no difference in SQoL between first-time implantees and those who underwent removal/replacement surgery (P = 1.0).Clinical ImplicationsPatients experience a positive impact on their SQoL following implantation of a penile prosthesis.Strengths & LimitationsOur study is the first to apply the English language QoLSPP which demonstrates high prosthesis specific SQoL but is limited by size and a lack of a validated English language tool.ConclusionsThe positive impact on patients’ SQoL with penile prosthesis is 84% when assessed by the English QoLSPP questionnaire. While these results mirror those reported from Italy, the English-speaking patient population is plagued with a lack of a validated tool to assess satisfaction, a void the academic and prosthetic community must fill to better understand the impact prostheses have on their patients.Carlos EC, Nosé BD, Barton GJ, et al. The Absence of a Validated English-Language Survey to Assess Prosthesis Satisfaction: A Prospective Cohort Using the Sexual Quality of Life After Penile Prosthesis. J Sex Med 2020;17:2307–2310.     

Suprapubic Fat Pad Excision with Simultaneous Placement of Inflatable Penile Prosthesis

Introduction

Many men suffering from erectile dysfunction are overweight with generous suprapubic fat pads, which often contribute to a decrease in visible exophytic phallic length.

Trends in Penile Prosthetics: Influence of Patient Demographics,Surgeon Volume,and Hospital Volume on Type of Penile Prosthesis Inserted in New York State

Introduction

Penile prostheses (PPs) are a discrete, well-tolerated treatment option for men with medical refractory erectile dysfunction. Despite the increasing prevalence of erectile dysfunction, multiple series evaluating inpatient data have found a decrease in the frequency of PP surgery during the past decade.