RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: With 50 years' experience, inflatable penile implants are the preferred option for erectile dysfunction refractory to pharmacological and mechanical treatment. Technical and surgical improvements have optimized patient success and satisfaction. However, multi-factorial dissatisfaction persists. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to provide an overview of available technological improvements and innovations, as well as the perioperative management and complications of inflatable penile implant surgery. METHOD: A literature review was carried out over the last twenty years to answer 4 questions: what are the different inflatable penile implants available in 2023, for which indications, results and complications. RESULTS: Four companies propose inflatable penile implants in France. The main improvements have been in the various components of the prosthesis with better cylinder extension, more ergonomic reservoirs, and more manageable pumps, leading to a better durability. Indications have been extended to patients suffering from Peyronie's disease and in emergency cases of priapism. In response to demand from the transgender population, specific phalloplasty implants have been developed. New options are being developed for difficult cases of retracted penis. Results show a high satisfaction rate. Currently the main challenge is the management of infection with the development of rescue protocols using antibiotics to preserve implants - or replace them in a single operation. CONCLUSION: After 50years' experience, improvements in penile implants led to effective, satisfactory and safe treatment and can be proposed in new indications. Further development is sill necessary to offer solutions in difficult cases.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Prótese de Pênis , Desenho de Prótese , Humanos , Masculino , França , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Implante Peniano/métodos , História do Século XX , História do Século XXI , Satisfação do PacienteRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Andrology and urogenital reconstruction are emerging disciplines in French urology. The aim of our study was to evaluate the evolution of andrological surgical procedures over the period 2013-2022 using national data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected national common classification of medical acts (CCAM) coding data for all procedures involving andrological surgery from the Scansanté internet platform set up by the Technical Agency for Information on Hospitalisation, which collects prospectively from healthcare structures all procedures coded according to CCAM coding. All surgical procedures in andrology were selected. The inclusion period extended from 2013 to 2022. RESULTS: In 10 years, the number of vasectomies has increased tenfold, with 29,890 cases in 2022. Vaso-vasostomies remain marginal, with 80 cases per year. Trans-identity surgeries are rising sharply. Vaginoplasties have multiplied by 4 (333 in 2022) and masculinising surgeries have multiplied by 10 (234 in 2022). Penile prosthesis surgery has increased slightly over 10 years. The number of testicular biopsies has remained stable over time, as has the number of surgeries for curvature of the penis. CONCLUSION: Two andrological surgeries are showing very strong growth: vasectomy and transgender surgery. The emergence of these 2 activities is linked to societal aspirations. Urologists need to be trained to meet this demand. NIVEAU DE PREUVE: Grade 4.
Assuntos
Vasectomia , Humanos , França , Masculino , Feminino , Vasectomia/estatística & dados numéricos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Cirurgia de Readequação Sexual , AndrologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: AI-derived language models are booming, and their place in medicine is undefined. The aim of our study is to compare responses to andrology clinical cases, between chatbots and andrologists, to assess the reliability of these technologies. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We analyzed the responses of 32 experts, 18 residents and three chatbots (ChatGPT v3.5, v4 and Bard) to 25 andrology clinical cases. Responses were assessed on a Likert scale ranging from 0 to 2 for each question (0-false response or no response; 1-partially correct response, 2- correct response), on the basis of the latest national or, in the absence of such, international recommendations. We compared the averages obtained for all cases by the different groups. RESULTS: Experts obtained a higher mean score (m=11/12.4 σ=1.4) than ChatGPT v4 (m=10.7/12.4 σ=2.2, p=0.6475), ChatGPT v3.5 (m=9.5/12.4 σ=2.1, p=0.0062) and Bard (m=7.2/12.4 σ=3.3, p<0.0001). Residents obtained a mean score (m=9.4/12.4 σ=1.7) higher than Bard (m=7.2/12.4 σ=3.3, p=0.0053) but lower than ChatGPT v3.5 (m=9.5/12.4 σ=2.1, p=0.8393) and v4 (m=10.7/12.4 σ=2.2, p=0.0183) and experts (m=11.0/12.4 σ=1.4,p=0.0009). ChatGPT v4 performance (m=10.7 σ=2.2) was better than ChatGPT v3.5 (m=9.5, σ=2.1, p=0.0476) and Bard performance (m=7.2 σ=3.3, p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: The use of chatbots in medicine could be relevant. More studies are needed to integrate them into clinical practice.
Assuntos
Andrologia , Inteligência Artificial , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Reprodutibilidade dos TestesRESUMO
Background and objective: Most trans women are requesting a gender affirming genital surgery by vulvovaginoplasty. However, long-term complications such as genital prolapse are unknown. Through this systematic review, our objective was to provide an overview of the published outcomes related to genital prolapse after vaginoplasty in male-to-female transgender individuals, including prevalence, identified risk factors, and treatment. Methods: We included all studies reporting genital prolapse rates following vulvovaginoplasty from 1995 to the present. Only studies that focused on the transgender population were included. The primary outcome was the genital prolapse rate. The secondary outcomes included risk factors and treatment of genital prolapse after vulvovaginoplasty. Article selection was performed by two independent reviewers. Key findings and limitations: Twenty-four studies, involving 3166 patients, that presented sufficient data were analyzed. The mean age at the time of vulvovaginoplasty was 37.7 yr. The mean follow-up time was 22.5 mo. Most of the studies were retrospective case series of low to intermediate quality. The penile skin inversion technique was the most frequently employed method (in 85% of the 3166 patients). The prevalence of prolapse ranged from 0% to 7% with the penile skin inversion technique and from 1.6% to 22.7% with intestinal vaginoplasty. Upon consolidating the results, an overall rate of 2.7% was observed. Specifically, the prolapse rate within the penile inversion technique subgroup was 2.5%, while the rate for the intestinal-derived neovagina subgroup was 3.5%. The only significant risk factor identified was a high body mass index at the time of surgery. The most employed intraoperative technique to prevent neovaginal prolapse involves fixation to the sacrospinous ligament, coupled with systematic vaginal packing. Few case reports addressed the surgical treatment of neovaginal prolapse, predominantly using open abdominal or laparoscopic approaches. None of these considered transvaginal or perineal approaches. No recommendation exists about the use of vaginal prosthesis. Conclusions and clinical implications: Neovaginal prolapse in male-to-female transgender patients remains a rare complication, but its significance is growing as the transgender population ages. Scarce information is available regarding preventative techniques and treatments, necessitating further exploration, hampered by its infrequent occurrence. Patient summary: Neovaginal prolapse in male-to-female transgender patients is a rare complication, with the only recognized risk factor being a high body mass index. However, its importance is growing with the aging of the transgender population. Long-term complications, preventive techniques, and management of these prolapses need to be explored through further research.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The Operated Male-to-Female Sexual Function Index (oMtFSFI) questionnaire is the first scoring system developed to assess sexual function after gender-affirming vulvo-vaginoplasty, and was initially developed and validated in Italian. The aim of this study was to provide linguistic validation of the questionnaire in French through several steps including use of the questionnaires across a series of patients who had undergone gender-affirming vulvo-vaginoplasty between 2020 and 2022 at two French academic centers. METHOD: The French version of the oMtFSFI questionnaire was obtained through a double translation (Italian to French) and a back-translation (French to Italian), validated by a scientific committee, and cognitively assessed by a panel of expert patients. The questionnaire was then distributed to transgender male to female patients who had undergone genital gender affirming surgery at two French academic centers. RESULTS: The oMtFSFI score consists of 18 questions exploring 7 domains (genital self-image, desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, sexual pain). Among the sixty-four patients who responded to the questionnaire, 16 patients (25%) reported abstaining from sexual activity involving vaginal penetration at the time of the study were excluded. The mean total score was 37, corresponding to mild to moderate sexual dysfunction and 60.4% of the patients reported normal overall sexual function. The level of sexual satisfaction was normal for 68.8% of the patients and the genital self-image was normal for 52.1%. Most of the patients (79.2%) reported at least mild dyspareunia and 10.4% had critical sexual dysfunction. Surgery improved gender dysphoria in 96.7% of patients. There was a strong correlation between the overall oMtFSFI score and the happiness Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (P<0.001) as well as with the quality of life VAS (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The French version of the oMtFSFI questionnaire is the only scoring system specifically developed to assess sexual function after vulvo-vaginoplasty in transgender women linguistically validated in French. Its validation in French language makes it an interesting tool for research and clinical practice.
RESUMO
Complications associated with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery using a synthetic non-absorbable mesh are uncommon (<5%) but may be severe and may hugely diminish the quality of life of some women. In drawing up these multidisciplinary clinical practice recommendations, the French National Authority for Health (Haute Autorité de santé, HAS) conducted an exhaustive review of the literature concerning the diagnosis, prevention, and management of complications associated with POP surgery using a synthetic mesh. Each recommendation for practice was allocated a grade (A,B or C; or expert opinion (EO)), which depends on the level of evidence (clinical practice guidelines). PREOPERATIVE PATIENTS' INFORMATION: Each patient must be informed concerning the risks associated with POP surgery (EO). HEMORRHAGE, HEMATOMA: Vaginal infiltration using a vasoconstrictive solution is not recommended during POP surgery by the vaginal route (grade C). The placement of vaginal packing is not recommended following POP surgery by the vaginal route (grade C). During laparoscopic sacral colpopexy, when the promontory seems highly dangerous or when severe adhesions prevent access to the anterior vertebral ligament, alternative surgical techniques should be discussed per operatively, including colpopexy by lateral mesh laparoscopic suspension, uterosacral ligament suspension, open abdominal mesh surgery, or surgery by the vaginal route (EO). BLADDER INJURY: When a bladder injury is diagnosed, bladder repair by suturing is recommended, using a slow resorption suture thread, plus monitoring of the permeability of the ureters (before and after bladder repair) when the injury is located at the level of the trigone (EO). When a bladder injury is diagnosed, after bladder repair, a prosthetic mesh (polypropylene or polyester material) can be placed between the repaired bladder and the vagina, if the quality of the suturing is good. The recommended duration of bladder catheterization following bladder repair in this context of POP mesh surgery is from 5 to 10 days (EO). URETER INJURY: After ureteral repair, it is possible to continue sacral colpopexy and place the mesh if it is located away from the ureteral repair (EO). RECTAL INJURY: Regardless of the approach, when a rectal injury occurs, a posterior mesh should not be placed between the rectum and the vagina wall (EO). Concerning the anterior mesh, it is recommended to use a macroporous monofilament polypropylene mesh (EO). A polyester mesh is not recommended in this situation (EO). VAGINAL WALL INJURY: After vaginal wall repair, an anterior or a posterior microporous polypropylene mesh can be placed, if the quality of the repair is found to be satisfactory (EO). A polyester mesh should not be used after vaginal wall repair (EO). MESH INFECTION (ABSCESS, CELLULITIS, SPONDYLODISCITIS): Regardless of the surgical approach, intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended (aminopenicillin + beta-lactamase inhibitor: 30 min before skin incision +/- repeated after 2 h if surgery lasts longer) (EO). When spondylodiscitis is diagnosed following sacral colpopexy, treatment should be discussed by a multidisciplinary group, including especially spine specialists (rheumatologists, orthopedists, neurosurgeons) and infectious disease specialists (EO). When a pelvic abscess occurs following synthetic mesh sacral colpopexy, it is recommended to carry out complete mesh removal as soon as possible, combined with collection of intraoperative bacteriological samples, drainage of the collection and targeted antibiotic therapy (EO). Non-surgical conservative management with antibiotic therapy may be an option (EO) in certain conditions (absence of signs of sepsis, macroporous monofilament polypropylene type 1 mesh, prior microbiological documentation and multidisciplinary consultation for the choice of type and duration of antibiotic therapy), associated with close monitoring of the patient. BOWEL OCCLUSION RELATED TO NON-CLOSURE OF THE PERITONEUM: Peritoneal closure is recommended after placement of a synthetic mesh by the abdominal approach (EO). URINARY RETENTION: Preoperative urodynamics is recommended in women presenting with urinary symptoms (bladder outlet obstruction symptoms, overactive bladder syndrome or incontinence) (EO). It is recommended to remove the bladder catheter at the end of the procedure or within 48 h after POP surgery (grade B). Bladder emptying and post-void residual should be checked following POP surgery, before discharge (EO). When postoperative urine retention occurs after POP surgery, it is recommended to carry out indwelling catheterization and to prefer intermittent self-catheterization (EO). POSTOPERATIVE PAIN: Before POP surgery, the patient should be asked about risk factors for prolonged and chronic postoperative pain (pain sensitization, allodynia, chronic pelvic or non-pelvic pain) (EO). Concerning the prevention of postoperative pain, it is recommended to carry out a pre-, per- and postoperative multimodal pain treatment (grade B). The use of ketamine intraoperatively is recommended for the prevention of chronic postoperative pelvic pain, especially for patients with risk factors (preoperative painful sensitization, allodynia, chronic pelvic or non-pelvic pain) (EO). Postoperative prescription of opioids should be limited in quantity and duration (grade C). When acute neuropathic pain (sciatalgia or pudendal neuralgia) resistant to level I and II analgesics occurs following sacrospinous fixation, a reintervention is recommended for suspension suture removal (EO). When chronic postoperative pain occurs after POP surgery, it is recommended to systematically seek arguments in favor of neuropathic pain with the DN4 questionnaire (EO). When chronic postoperative pelvic pain occurs after POP surgery, central sensitization should be identified since it requires a consultation in a chronic pain department (EO). Concerning myofascial pain syndrome (clinical pain condition associated with increased muscle tension caused by myofascial trigger points), when chronic postoperative pain occurs after POP surgery, it is recommended to examine the levator ani, piriformis and obturator internus muscles, so as to identify trigger points on the pathway of the synthetic mesh (EO). Pelvic floor muscle training with muscle relaxation is recommended when myofascial pain syndrome is associated with chronic postoperative pain following POP surgery (EO). After failure of pelvic floor muscle training (3 months), it is recommended to discuss surgical removal of the synthetic mesh, during a multidisciplinary discussion group meeting (EO). Partial removal of synthetic mesh is indicated when a trigger point is located on the pathway of the mesh (EO). Total removal of synthetic mesh should be discussed during a multidisciplinary discussion group meeting when diffuse (no trigger point) chronic postoperative pain occurs following POP surgery, with or without central sensitization or neuropathic pain syndromes (EO). POSTOPERATIVE DYSPAREUNIA: When de novo postoperative dyspareunia occurs after POP surgery, surgical removal of the mesh should be discussed (EO). VAGINAL MESH EXPOSURE: To reduce the risk of vaginal mesh exposure, when hysterectomy is required during sacral colpopexy, subtotal hysterectomy is recommended (grade C). When asymptomatic vaginal macroporous monofilament polypropylene mesh exposure occurs, systematic imaging is not recommended. When vaginal polyester mesh exposure occurs, pelvic +/- lumbar MRI (EO) should be used to look for an abscess or spondylodiscitis, given the greater risk of infection associated with this type of material. When asymptomatic vaginal mesh exposure of less than 1 cm2 occurs in a woman with no sexual intercourse, the patient should be offered observation (no treatment) or local estrogen therapy (EO). However, if the patient wishes, partial excision of the mesh can be offered. When asymptomatic vaginal mesh exposure of more than 1 cm2 occurs or if the woman has sexual intercourse, or if it is a polyester prosthesis, partial mesh excision, either immediately or after local estrogen therapy, should be offered (EO). When symptomatic vaginal mesh exposure occurs, but without infectious complications, surgical removal of the exposed part of the mesh by the vaginal route is recommended (EO), and not systematic complete excision of the mesh. Following sacral colpopexy, complete removal of the mesh (by laparoscopy or laparotomy) is only required in the presence of an abscess or spondylodiscitis (EO). When vaginal mesh exposure recurs after a first reoperation, the patient should be treated by an experienced team specialized in this type of complication (EO). SUTURE THREAD VAGINAL EXPOSURE: For women presenting with vaginal exposure to non-absorbable suture thread following POP surgery with mesh reinforcement, the suture thread should be removed by the vaginal route (EO). Removal of the surrounding mesh is only recommended when vaginal mesh exposure or associated abscess is diagnosed. BLADDER AND URETERAL MESH EXPOSURE: When bladder mesh exposure occurs, removal of the exposed part of the mesh is recommended (grade B). Both alternatives (total or partial mesh removal) should be discussed with the patient and should be debated during a multidisciplinary discussion group meeting (EO).