Search

Inflatable Penile Prostheses (IPP) implantation is a surgical treatment for patients desiring definitive treatment for erectile dysfunction. While this procedure has proven to be effective, it also carries its own set of unique risks that need to be carefully considered. The article reviews the current understanding of complications associated with penile prosthetic surgery and provides strategies to mitigate these adverse events. This article covers various aspects of IPP implantation, including the risks of infection, bleeding, injury to nearby structures, glans ischemia, and device malfunction. It also discusses the importance of careful preoperative screening to identify risk factors and the implementation of infection reduction strategies such as antimicrobial prophylaxis, skin prep, and operative techniques. In addition, it emphasizes the need for postoperative vigilance and prompt management of any complications that may arise. Overall, the article provides a comprehensive overview of the risks and strategies for mitigating complications associated with IPP implantation. Our recommendations are given based on the current consensus in the field and highlight the importance of careful planning, attention to detail, and effective communication between healthcare providers and patients. Despite the potential risks, this review underscores the fact that complications following penile prosthesis implantation are relatively rare.

Purpose of Review: In modern healthcare, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) has revolutionized clinical practices, particularly in data management and patient visit summary creation. Manual creation of patient summary is repetitive, time-consuming, prone to errors, and increases clinicians' workload. AI, through voice recognition and Natural Language Processing (NLP), can automate this task more accurately and efficiently. Erectile dysfunction (ED) clinics, which deal with specific pattern of conditions together with an involvement of broader systemic issues, can greatly benefit from AI-driven patient summary. This scoping review examined the evidence on AI-generated patient summary and evaluated their implementation in ED clinics., Recent Findings: A total of 381 articles were initially identified, 11 studies were included for the analysis. These studies showcased various methodologies, such as AI-assisted clinical notes and NLP algorithms. Most studies have demonstrated the ability of AI to be used in real life clinical scenarios. Major electronic health record platforms are also integrating AI to their system. However, to date, no studies have specifically addressed AI for patient summary creation in ED clinics., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate Not applicable. Consent for Publication Not applicable. Competing Interests FY: Coloplast: Advisory board, speaker; Endo: Advisory board; Haleon: Advisory board; Halozyme: Advisory board, speaker; Masimo: Intellectual property; Softwave: Advisory board; Sprout: Consultant; Vertica: Research investigator; Xialla: Advisory board., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Priapism is a rare condition characterized by prolonged and often painful penile erection unrelated to sexual stimulation. Ischemic priapism, the most common subtype, requires immediate attention to prevent irreversible damage to erectile tissue. This narrative review explores the initial management strategies for ischemic priapism. Intracavernosal phenylephrine injection and aspiration with or without irrigation are recommended as first-line treatments, with alternative options available depending on clinical settings and patient factors. While guidelines offer clear recommendations for priapism lasting more than 4 h, management of shorter-duration cases remains challenging due to limited evidence., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Telemedicine gained wide acceptance during the COVID-19 pandemic, as it was deemed critical for patient care when lockdowns were implemented worldwide. While there is evidence to suggest that urology patients were receptive to telemedicine, no systematic review has been done to date on andrology patients and their perception of telemedicine., Methods: Three electronic databases, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched from their inception until June 2022 for relevant articles. Two independent teams reviewed abstracts and extracted data from the selected manuscripts. A meta-analysis was completed in line with PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR Guidelines. For our study, we limited telemedicine to communication through videoconferencing or telephone encounters between patients and medical professionals. Positive response to telemedicine was defined as patients "wishing for telemedicine consultation", "preferring telemedicine over in person", "accepting the current telemedicine arrangement", "having needs addressed with teleconsultation", or "willingness to do a teleconsultation"., Results: Of the 1128 retrieved abstracts, 56 underwent full-text review and 12 were included in the final analysis, comprising a total cohort of >4021 cases. Video visits were evaluated in 5 studies, telephone encounters were analyzed in 2 studies, and both methods were examined in 1 randomized control study. Three studies showed that andrology and sexual medicine are compatible with telemedicine, with few 30- and 90-day in-person revisit rates. Telemedicine was shown to save an average cost of US$149-$252 per patient, and 8 studies that directly assessed andrology patient perceptions of telemedicine showed that most patients had a "positive perception."Pooled analyses of the positive responses to telemedicine were 68.7% (95% CI, 49.4%-83.1%, P = 0.057), and those of patients who recommended telemedicine were 65.1% (95% CI, 18.4%-93.9%, P = 0.577). While the percentage of patients recommending telemedicine was high among studies using videoconferencing, the percentage dropped in studies using telephone visits only. The difference between recommending video and telephone practices was statistically significant, with 84.6% pooled proportion for recommending video practice compared to 38.9% pooled proportion for recommending telephone practice, P = 0.035. In the telephone-only encounters, up to 27.1% of patients preferred in-person visits, as security and privacy of any mode of telecommunication were of concern., Conclusions: Most patients have a positive perception of telemedicine, particularly with videoconferencing and less so with telephone visits. These results suggest that telemedicine will likely continue to play a pivotal role in andrology and sexual medicine practices., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Society of Sexual Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)