Search

Objective: To assess the difference in outcomes between single dilation (SingD) and sequential dilation (SeqD) in primary penile implantation, hypothesizing that patients who undergo SeqD had higher rates of noninfectious complications., Methods: We performed a multicenter, retrospective study of men undergoing primary inflatable penile prosthesis placement. Intraoperative complications and postoperative noninfectious outcomes were assessed between the two groups. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of complications., Results: A total of 3293 patients met inclusion criteria. After matching, there were 379 patients who underwent SingD and 379 patients who underwent SeqD. There was no significant difference in intraoperative complications between patients who underwent SingD vs SeqD, nor was there any difference in cylinder length (20 cm with interquartile range [IQR] 18-21 cm vs 20 cm with IQR 18-20 cm respectively, P = .4). On multivariable analysis, SeqD (OR 5.23 with IQR 2.74-10, P < .001) and older age (OR 1.04 with IQR 1.01-1.06, P = .007) were predictive of postoperative noninfectious complications. There was no significant difference in intraoperative complications between patients who underwent SingD vs SeqD, nor was there any difference in cylinder length. SeqD and older age were predictive of postoperative noninfectious complications., Conclusion: During inflatable penile prosthesis placement in the uncomplicated patient without fibrosis, SingD is a safe technique to utilize during implantation that will minimize postoperative adverse events, and promote device longevity without loss of cylinder length., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Martin S. Gross, consultant for Coloplast. Daniar Osmonov, consultant for Coloplast, Intuitive Surgical, Fidelis. Aaron Lentz, speaker, consultant, preceptor for Coloplast and Boston Scientific. Paul Perito, consultant for Coloplast, Boston Scientific, Urofill. Matthew Ziegelmann, consultant for Endo Pharma. Faysal A. Yafi, consultant for Coloplast, Cynosure, Antares Pharma, Clarus Pharmaceuticals, Acerus Pharma. Jay Simhan, consultant for Boston Scientific, Coloplast. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes of intracorporeal (ICNB) and extracorporeal neobladder (ECNB) following robot assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) from a multi-institutional, prospectively maintained database, the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium (IRCC)., Methods: A retrospective review of IRCC database between 2003 and 2020 (3742 patients from 33 institutions across 14 countries) was performed (I-79606). The Cochran-Armitage trend test was used to assess utilization of ICNB over time. Multivariate logistic regression models were fit to evaluate variables associated with receiving ICNB, overall complications, high-grade complications, and readmissions after RARC. Kaplan Meier curves were used to depict recurrence-free, disease-specific, and overall survival., Results: Four hundred eleven patients received neobladder, 64% underwent ICNB. ICNB utilization increased significantly over time (P <.01). Patients who received ICNB were readmitted and received neoadjuvant chemotherapy more frequently (36% vs 24%, P = .03, 35% vs 8%, P <.01, respectively). ICNB was associated with older age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07, P = .001), receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 4.63, 95% CI 2.34-9.18, P <.01), and more recent RARC era (2016-2020) (OR 12.6, 95% CI 5.6-28.4, P <.01). On multivariate analysis, ICNB (OR 5.43, 95% CI 2.34-12.58, P <.01), positive surgical margin (OR 4.88, 95% CI 1.29-18.42, P = .019), longer operative times (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.00-1.58, P = .048), and institutional annual RARC volume (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.05-1.12, P <.01) were associated with readmissions., Conclusion: Utilization of ICNB increased significantly over time. Patients who underwent RARC and ICNB had shorter hospital stays and fewer 30-d reoperations but were readmitted more frequently compared to those who underwent ECNB., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To examine the occurrence of 30-day mortality, and other procedure related morbidities in cohorts of patient receiving neuraxial anesthesia (NAX) or general anesthesia (GA) in the setting of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Historically, NAX has been recommended for patients undergoing TURP permitting monitoring of consciousness and early diagnosis of absorption-related hyponatremia. We aim to analyze a broader comparison of mortality and other associated morbidities regarding the form of anesthesia utilized., Methods: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was accessed and queried from January 2010 to December 2016 for TURP. 28,486 TURP cases were identified and further stratified by the type anesthesia administration, NAX 7,261 and GA 21,225. Chi-square analyses and Kaplan-Meier tests were performed for univariate comparisons. Using propensity score, data were optimally (1:1) matched to account for potential confounding variables. Outcomes were then compared for NAX vs. GA with a primary endpoint of 30-day mortality, followed by secondary endpoint of adverse outcomes reported per NSQIP., Results: Prior to matching, 30-day mortality was found to be 0.4% in the NAX cohort and 0.7% GA. 12,180 patients equally matched between the 2 groups. NAX was found to be superior to GA in terms of 30-day survival benefit (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 -0.92, P <0.05), sepsis (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.50 -0.73, P <0.001), and return to operating room (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 -0.98, P <0.05) when comparing matched cohorts. NAX was associated with lower incidence of overall adverse clinical outcomes 12.4% vs 13.7% (P = 0.036)., Conclusion: NAX was found to have statistically relevant advantage for 30-day postoperative outcomes when compared to GA for TURP based on NSQIP database reporting., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)