A scoping review of penile implant biofilms-what do we know and what remains unknown?

Background: Penile prosthesis (PP) is a gold standard for treatment of erectile dysfunction given its reliability and efficacy. Infection remains the most feared complication of prosthetic surgery, which usually results in device removal, and places a significant economic burden on the healthcare system. While biofilms have shown to support the persistence of microorganisms, the degree by which this matrix is truly pathogenic remains unknown given its high prevalence even in asymptomatic patients. We aim to review and summarize the current literature pertaining to biofilm formation in the setting of PP surgeries in clinically infected and non-infected cases. Methods: Searches were performed in the MEDLINE online database through PubMed using a combination of keywords "penile prosthetic" OR "penile prosthesis" OR "penile implant" AND "biofilm" OR "revision" OR "removal" OR "infection" OR "explant". Eleven articles met inclusion criteria. There were only three studies that explicitly listed the number of biofilms identified in their cohort, but we also included eight articles that mentioned swabbing and culturing of any bacterial biofilm during revision procedures for both clinically infected and non-infected implants. Results: Infected PP yielded a 11-100% rate of biofilm presence, while non-infected PP yielded a 3-70% rate of biofilm presence. Time to reoperation from initial PP placement were also largely variable, ranging from 2 weeks to over 2 years. Coagulase-negative staphylococcus (i.e., Staphylococcus epidermidis) were the most commonly reported organisms among non-infected implants, however, newer studies have identified a change towards more virulent organisms. Conclusions: Since the advent of PP surgery, diabetes control, revision washout protocols and antibiotic-impregnated devices have led to an overall decrease in biofilm formation and infectious complications. There is an overall paradigm shift in microbial profiles with more virulent organisms, such as Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus species, and even fungal species beginning to replace the more common coagulase-negative staphylococcal species, especially in clinically infected implants. Additional studies are necessary to define the significance of bacterial presence in biofilms using impactful technologies such as next-generation sequencing. Currently, preliminary and experimental biofilm-control strategies are also underway to further address this clinical issue.

Nonobstetrical Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery in Pregnancy: A Systematic Literature Review.

Urologic and gynecologic surgeons are the top utilizers of robotic surgery; however, nonobstetrical robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) in pregnant patients is infrequent. A systematic literature review was performed to ascertain the frequency, indication and complications of RALS in pregnancy. Results showed 38 pregnancies from eleven publications between 2008 and 2020. Five cases were for urologic indication and 33 for gynecologic indication. Minimal surgical alterations were required. Although no adverse maternal-fetal outcomes were reported, there are not enough cases published to determine safety. This review demonstrates the feasibility of RALS for the pregnant population in the hands of competent robotic surgeons.