Spermatic Cord Block Series as a Minimally Invasive Therapy for Chronic Scrotal Content Pain.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of our study was to evaluate relief of chronic scrotal content pain after a series of spermatic cord blocks with a combination of local anesthetic and a steroid. Secondary aims were to assess factors associated with a positive response and complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent spermatic cord block series for chronic scrotal content pain at our practice between 2012 and 2019. Pain scores were compared before and after treatment using an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. We performed univariate analysis to assess differences between responders and nonresponders, and the relationship between symptom duration and response was analyzed by rank-order correlation. RESULTS: We included 44 men with chronic scrotal content pain present for a median duration of 24 months who underwent a spermatic cord block series. At a median followup of 16 months, 31 patients (70.5%) experienced sustained relief, including 9 patients (20.5%) with complete resolution of pain. There were no differences between responders and nonresponders in terms of symptom duration, perceived etiology, or previous treatments, and there was no association between response and duration of pain. Minor complications occurred in 5 cases (11.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Spermatic cord block series is a safe, minimally invasive treatment for men with refractory chronic scrotal content pain. Response to cord block series appears to be independent of symptom duration, perceived etiology or prior medical and surgical treatments. Future studies should be conducted to evaluate long-term durability and predictors of success.

Perioperative and Complication Related Outcomes for Robotic-Assisted vs Open Radical Cystectomy: A Comparative National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Analysis.

Background: Radical cystectomy (RC) is standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, but it comes with significant perioperative risk, with half of the patients experiencing major postoperative complications. Robot-assisted radical cystectomies (RARCs) have aimed to decrease patient morbidity and been increasingly adopted in North America. Currently, both open radical cystectomies (ORCs) and RARCs are frequently performed. The aim of this study is to contribute to the existing literature using newly available data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP), representing one of the most recent, largest multi-institutional studies, while uniquely accounting for a variety of factors, including type of urinary diversion, cancer staging, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: RC procedures performed between 2019 and 2021 were identified in NSQIP and the corresponding cystectomy-targeted database. Cases in the ORC group were planned open procedures, and cases in the RARC group were robot assisted, including unplanned conversion to open cases for intention to treat. Chi-square and t-tests were performed to compare baseline demographics and operative parameters. Multivariate analysis was performed for outcomes, including major complications, minor complications, and 30-day mortality rates, while adjusting for baseline differences significant on univariate analysis. Results: Five thousand three hundred forty-three RC cases were identified. Of these, 70% underwent planned ORC, while 30% received RARC. RARC was associated with longer operative times and shorter hospital length of stay compared with ORC. On multivariate analysis, there was no difference between the cohorts in 30-day rates of major complications, hospital readmissions, need for reoperation, or mortality. ORC was, however, associated with higher rates of minor complications, bleeding, superficial surgical site infections, and anastomotic leak. Conclusions: In the NSQIP database, ORC is associated with higher rates of 30-day minor complications, most notably bleeding, compared with RARC. However, there is no difference in regard to perioperative major morbidity or mortality rates. This study is unique in the size of the cohorts compared, timeliness of data (2019-2021), applicability to a variety of different practice settings across the country, and ability to control for factors, such as type of urinary diversion and pathological bladder cancer staging, as well as use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) specific to Thomas Jefferson University.

Stent vs Stent-Less Ileal Conduits After Radical Cystectomy: Is There a Difference in Early Postoperative Outcomes?

INTRODUCTION: Placing ureteral stents at the uretero-ileal anastomosis for radical cystectomy with ileal conduit (RCIC) has long been common practice. Recently, some providers have begun omitting stents. We sought to investigate differences in perioperative and 30-day outcomes between patients who underwent radical cystectomy with ileal conduit (RCIC) with and without stents placed at the uretero-ileal anastomosis. METHODS: We identified RCICs performed between 2019 to 2021 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database and corresponding Cystectomy-Targeted Participant Use File. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and operative parameters were compared via Pearson's chi-square and t-tests between stented and stent-less RCICs. Outcomes of interest, including rates of urinary tract infections (UTIs), acute kidney injury (AKI), renal failure requiring dialysis, ileoileal anastomotic leaks, ureteral obstruction, urinary leak or fistula formation, reoperations, and 30-day hospital readmissions were compared using Pearson's chi-square. All statistical tests were 2 tailed with P < .05 considered significant. RESULTS: Five Thousand Four Hundred Eighteen RCICs were identified. Four hundred ninety-eight (9.2%) were stent-less. There were no differences in baseline demographics or comorbidities. Significantly fewer stented patients had robotic-assisted operations (23% vs 29%, P < .01). Stented patients had lower rates of urinary leak or fistula formation (3.1% vs 4.8%, P = .04). There was no significant difference in 30-day rates of UTIs, AKIs, renal failure, ileoileal anastomotic leaks, ureteral obstruction, reoperations, and readmissions. Limitations include retrospective design and lack of longitudinal tracking past 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Stent-less patients had non-inferior outcomes compared to stented patients in most important 30-day outcomes. Our analysis suggests that stents may not be necessary in ileal conduit urinary diversion procedures.

Device profile of the Ambicor two-piece inflatable penile prosthesis for treatment of erectile dysfunction: overview of its safety and efficacy.

Introduction: Erectile dysfunction is one of the most common forms of male sexual dysfunction worldwide. Over the past several decades, the inflatable penile prosthesis has emerged as the gold standard surgical treatment for refractory erectile dysfunction. The vast majority of current penile implants are three-piece inflatable penile prostheses. However, the design of the two-piece inflatable penile prosthesis offers certain advantages for both the patient and surgeon, and may be the preferred penile implant for certain patient populations.Areas covered: The Ambicor two-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (Men's Health Division, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) was introduced in 1994 by American Medical Systems (Minnetonka, MN, USA, now a subsidiary of Boston Scientific) and received further design improvements in 1998 to address early mechanical issues with the device. Currently, the Ambicor is the only two-piece inflatable penile prosthesis available in the United States. This review article aims to provide an overview of the Ambicor device and summarize the best available clinical data regarding outcomes and safety.Expert opinion: While two-piece devices account for a small minority of current penile implants, the Ambicor should be considered a safe, reliable, and effective option for appropriately selected patients with the advantage of avoiding blind reservoir placement.