An Analysis of a Commercial Database on the Use of Erectile Dysfunction Treatments for Men With Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the annual erectile dysfunction (ED) prevalence among men enrolled in an employer-sponsored health insurance (ESHI) plan and evaluate ED treatment profiles among those with an ED diagnosis. METHODS: A cross-sectional claims analysis was conducted using the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database, a nationally representative sample of US workers enrolled in ESHI plans. Patients aged 18-64 with at least one ED medical diagnosis claim and continuous enrollment in a given year between 2009 and 2017 were included. Among those with an ED diagnosis, utilization rates of the following ED treatments were determined: phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5I), penile prosthesis implantation, other ED treatments (eg, vacuum pump, intraurethral suppositories), combination treatment, and no insurer-paid treatments. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2017, the annual prevalence of men with ESHI suffering from ED increased by 116%. However, in 2017, only 23% of men with an ED diagnosis received an ED therapy paid for by their ESHI plans. The proportion of men taking PDE5Is ranged from 18% in 2012 to 26% in 2015. The proportion of men with ED undergoing penile prosthesis implantation has declined in recent years (0.23% in 2009 to 0.11% in 2017). Similarly, the rate of men who received other ED treatments or combination treatment has decreased from 2009 to 2017 (0.94%-0.30% and 0.65%-0.19%, respectively). CONCLUSION: ED prevalence among men insured by an ESHI plan has notably increased, yet approximately three-quarters of these men had no claims for ED treatments, indicating substantial access gaps to treatment.

Predictors of Patient Willingness to Consider Surgery Prior to Consultation at Sexual Health Clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with patient willingness to consider surgical treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) prior to urologic consultation. METHODS: A prospective database of patients presenting to the sexual health clinic at our institution was created from 2014 to 2018, consisting of previsit patient questionnaires and clinical information. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with consideration of surgery and decision to undergo surgery. RESULTS: Of 1359 men presenting to the clinic, 991 men had a chief complaint of ED with 630 (63.6%) considering surgery. On multivariable analysis, factors significantly associated with previsit willingness for surgery included history of diabetes mellitus (P = .0009), increasing symptom bother (P <.0001), and decreasing relationship duration (P = .0005). Approximately 16% (162/991) patients considering surgery prior to consultation ultimately underwent penile implant insertion. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that older age (P = .003), history of diabetes mellitus (P = .03), lower international index of erectile function-EF domain (P = .0009) and history of intracavernosal injection therapy (P <.0001) were significantly associated with proceeding to ED surgery. Initial declaration of willingness to undergo ED surgery led to nearly 8-fold increased odds for surgery (P <.0001). CONCLUSION: Over 60% of patients presenting for ED consultation considered surgical intervention, of whom 25% underwent penile prosthesis. Both patient and relationship factors were predictors of surgical willingness. Previsit surgical willingness was associated with highest odds of eventual decision for surgery, suggesting that knowledge of ED treatment options in the general public may play a role. Our findings highlight opportunities for shared decision-making in a patient-centered model of care.

Rural Medicare patients less likely to undergo penile prosthesis implantation following radical cystectomy.

INTRODUCTION Erectile dysfunction is common after radical cystectomy; however, research on sexual dysfunction after this procedure is relatively scarce. Our goal was to evaluate the incidence of penile prosthesis implantation after radical cystectomy, with a focus on rural/urban disparity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the SEER-Medicare database to identify patients with bladder cancer diagnosed between 1991-2009 who had a radical cystectomy (ICD-9 codes 57.7, 57.71, 57.79). The outcome was placement of a penile implant (ICD-9 codes 64.95 and 64.97). Covariates extracted included rural county status, age, race, ethnicity, marital status, geographic region, socioeconomic status, Charlson comorbidity, pathologic cancer stage, and type of urinary diversion. RESULTS: A total of 95 penile implants were performed in the 11,477 cystectomy patients (0.83%). Patients who had a penile implant were mostly from urban counties (85.1%) and in the Western region of the United States (83.9%). After controlling for covariates, rural patients who underwent an ileal conduit for urinary diversion were less likely to have a penile prosthesis procedure after radical cystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Penile prosthetic procedures are uncommon in bladder cancer patients who have undergone radical cystectomy; therefore, sexual health should be considered and discussed with patients after radical cystectomy.

Regional Variation in Penile Prosthesis Utilization among Medicare Patients with Erectile Dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize penile prosthesis surgery utilization and assess for regional differences in the use of this procedure across the United States. MATERIALS & METHODS: We examined penile prosthesis surgeries (inflatable and semirigid implants) in Medicare beneficiaries with erectile dysfunction (ED) for the years 2006 through 2014. Adjusted utilization rates were calculated per 1000 beneficiaries accounting for age and race. Utilization rates were examined nationally and by hospital referral region (HRR). RESULTS: The national adjusted rate of penile prosthesis surgery declined from 5.41 per 1000 beneficiaries in 2006 to 3.74 per 1000 beneficiaries in 2014. The number of beneficiaries diagnosed with ED outpaced the number of patients undergoing surgery. Regional variation was observed; a 12-fold difference in 2014 (1.9/1000 in Norfolk, VA to 24.2/1000 in Miami, FL). Adjustment of 2014 data by urology provider density reduced variation between HRRs, and as a result a 3.5-fold difference was observed. Over 60% of HRRs performed 0 to <11 surgeries. CONCLUSION: The rate of penile prosthesis surgery is declining amongst Medicare beneficiaries with ED. Significant regional variation exists in the utilization of penile prosthesis surgery. This variation may be explained by a series of urologist and patient-specific factors, including provider density. Penile prosthesis surgery in Medicare beneficiaries is likely highly dependent on where these patients seek care.

Epidemiology regarding penile prosthetic surgery.

With the onset of a metabolic syndrome epidemic and the increasing life expectancy, erectile dysfunction (ED) has become a more common condition. As incidence and prevalence increase, the medical field is focused on providing more appropriate therapies. It is common knowledge that ED is a chronic condition that is also associated with a myriad of other disorders. Conditions such as aging, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, obesity, prostatic hypertrophy, and prostate cancer, among others, have a direct implication on the onset and progression of ED. Characterization and recognition of risk factors may help clinicians recognize and properly treat patients suffering from ED. One of the most reliable treatments for ED is penile prosthetic surgery. Since the introduction of the penile prosthesis (PP) in the early seventies, this surgical procedure has improved the lives of thousands of men, with reliable and satisfactory results. The aim of this review article is to characterize the epidemiology of men undergoing penile prosthetic surgery, with a discussion about the most common conditions involved in the development of ED, and that ultimately drive patients into electing to undergo PP placement.

Epidemiology regarding penile prosthetic surgery / 亚洲男科学杂志(英文版)

With the onset of a metabolic syndrome epidemic and the increasing life expectancy, erectile dysfunction (ED) has become a more common condition. As incidence and prevalence increase, the medical field is focused on providing more appropriate therapies. It is common knowledge that ED is a chronic condition that is also associated with a myriad of other disorders. Conditions such as aging, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, obesity, prostatic hypertrophy, and prostate cancer, among others, have a direct implication on the onset and progression of ED. Characterization and recognition of risk factors may help clinicians recognize and properly treat patients suffering from ED. One of the most reliable treatments for ED is penile prosthetic surgery. Since the introduction of the penile prosthesis (PP) in the early seventies, this surgical procedure has improved the lives of thousands of men, with reliable and satisfactory results. The aim of this review article is to characterize the epidemiology of men undergoing penile prosthetic surgery, with a discussion about the most common conditions involved in the development of ED, and that ultimately drive patients into electing to undergo PP placement.

Long-Term Follow-Up After Penile Prosthesis Implantation-Survival and Quality of Life Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Hydraulic penile prostheses have shown an overall good mechanical reliability up to 10 years after surgery; however, few data have been published on very long-term follow-up. AIM: We looked at long-term (≥15 years) complications, including functional and quality of life (QoL) outcomes, after 3-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation in patients with erectile dysfunction (ED). METHODS: Data regarding 149 patients submitting to IPP placement before 2001 were analyzed. All patients were implanted with AMS CX and Ultrex Plus 3-piece prostheses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Patients were reassessed to evaluate rates of complications and functional outcomes. The validated questionnaire Quality of Life and Sexuality with Penile Prosthesis (QoLSPP) was used to assess patient QoL. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated the probability of prosthesis survival (defined as working device/not-explanted). RESULTS: Median follow-up of 51 patients was 206 months (interquartile range [IQR], 145-257). The etiology of ED was vasculogenic (n = 20; 39%), Peyronie's disease (n = 15; 29%), pelvic surgery (n = 4; 7.8%), organic other than vasculogenic (n = 3; 5.9%), or other (n = 9; 18%). Throughout the follow-up, 24 patients (49%) experienced complications: mechanical failure (n = 19; 79%), pain (n = 3; 12%), orgasmic dysfunctions (n = 1; 4.5%), or device infection (n = 1; 4.5%). The estimated IPP survival was 53% (95% CI, 36-67) at 20-year follow-up. Baseline characteristics (age, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, and erectile dysfunction etiology) were not significantly associated with the risk of IPP failure over time by Cox regression analysis. At 20-year follow-up, 41% (95% CI, 19-49) of the patients were still using the device. Among them, QoLSPP median domain scores were high: functional 22/25 (IQR, 20-23), relational 17/20 (IQR, 15-18), personal 14/15 (IQR, 12-15), and social 14/15 (IQR, 11-15). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The longevity of the device and long-term satisfaction rates should be comprehensively discussed during patient consultation for IPP surgery. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting long-term QoL outcomes using a dedicated questionnaire for penile prostheses. The low response rate for the telephone interviews, the retrospective design of the study, and the relatively small number of patients are the main limitations. CONCLUSION: Long-term follow-up data after IPP placement showed that almost half of the devices still worked properly 20 years after the original penile implant, as 60% of patients were still using the device with high satisfaction and adequate QoL outcomes. Both patients and physicians should be aware of the expected life and outcomes of IPP implants. Chierigo F, Capogrosso P, Dehò, et al. Long-Term Follow-Up After Penile Prosthesis Implantation-Survival and Quality of Life Outcomes. J Sex Med 2019;16:1827-1833.

Impact of Pelvic Radiation Therapy on Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Reoperation Rates.

INTRODUCTION: Considering that radiation therapy (RT) compromises soft tissue microvasculature, impairs wound healing, and causes cavernosal fibrosis, inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) outcomes may be adversely affected in men treated with RT. AIM: To compare IPP outcomes among those who had undergone prior RT vs a cohort who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) before insertion of IPP. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare Database was queried for men with prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent RT (n = 83,277) or RP (n = 32,608) with subsequent IPP insertion between 2002 and 2013. Men who had undergone both RT and RP were excluded from the analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was reoperation, defined by removal, revision, or replacement of the IPP. RESULTS: We identified 350 men who received an IPP following RT and 653 who received an IPP following RP. Men who underwent RT were older (P < .01) and had more comorbidities (P < .01). There were no significant differences in overall reoperation rates at 90 days (P = .78), 1 year (P = .52), or 3 years (P = .48). Time-to-event analysis demonstrated that RT was not associated with an increased likelihood of overall reoperation (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94-2.29, P = .09). There was no association between time from RT to IPP and overall reoperation rates. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Prior RT for the treatment of PCa does not impact the revision or removal rates of IPPs as compared with a cohort of non-radiated patients who underwent RP. STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS: The strength includes the analysis of outcomes among a contemporary, nationwide cohort with robust follow-up. Using diagnosis and procedure codes, we were thoroughly able to capture reoperations. Limitations include the lack of specific indications for reoperation and inability to control for surgeon experience or technique. CONCLUSION: IPP is a safe and effective treatment of erectile dysfunction that should be offered to men with a history of pelvic radiation who have failed medical therapy. Golan R, Patel NA, Sun T, et al. Impact of pelvic radiation therapy on inflatable penile prosthesis reoperation rates. J Sex Med 2018;15:1653-1658.

[Is transition from pure laparoscopic to robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy associated with increase of surgical procedures for urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction?] / L'introduction de la chirurgie robot-assistée pour la prostatectomie totale s'accompagne-t-elle d'une modification du nombre d'interventions secondaires pour troubles fonctionnels génito-urinaires ?

OBJECTIVE: To study the impact of changing the technique of radical prostatectomy [pure laparoscopic radical (PR-Lap) to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP-Rob)] on the rate of secondary procedures for urinary incontinence (UI) and erectile dysfunction (ED). MATERIAL: Retrospective study evaluating the number and type of surgical procedures for post-RP UI and DE between 2008 and 2015, according to the technique of (RP-Lap or RP-Rob). RESULTS: Between 2008 et 2015, 2046 RP were performed in our department including 372 RP-Lap and 1674 RP-Rob. Among these patients, 84 (4%) had a surgical procedure for post-RP UI (18 AMS800, 9 balloons Pro-Act, and 57 male slings) and 15 (0.7%) had implantation of penile prosthesis for post-RP ED; 16 (0.7%) patients had both procedures. The mean delay between RP and UI surgery decrease from 3.2 years in 2008 to 1 year in 2015 and remain stable for penile prosthesis implantation (mean delay: 3.4 years). The overall rates of secondary procedures for UI and DE remained stable and below 5% and 1.7%, respectively, even during the transition period. For each year of PR studied, the rates of secondary procedure were higher in the RP-Lap group. CONCLUSION: Changing the technique of RP from RP-Lap to PR-Rob has a favorable impact on the rate of secondary procedures for UI and ED from the outset.

Ambicor Two-Piece Inflatable Penile Prosthesis: Background and Contemporary Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The two-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP; Ambicor) might be a preferred option for men with erectile dysfunction (ED) who have significant retroperitoneal scarring, limited manual dexterity, or other issues. There are reported differences in outcomes and patient and partner satisfaction between three-piece and two-piece IPPs. AIM: To report contemporary outcomes, patient and partner satisfaction, and mechanical durability data of the two-piece compared with the three-piece IPP. METHODS: A PubMed search was performed related to two-piece penile prostheses. Emphasis was placed on perioperative outcomes and patient and/or partner satisfaction scores. Non-English-language articles were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Use of the Ambicor two-piece penile prosthesis was assessed by outlining the contemporary literature. The etiology of ED in this population, mechanical attributes, penile morphologic changes, satisfaction, and its use in special populations were reviewed. RESULTS: The most common etiology of ED for placement of the device remains a vasculogenic cause (range = 11-62%). Overall complication rates were 2.1% to 11.2% for the general population. Mechanical failure was seen in 0.7% to 6.1%. Infection rates were 0.7% to 4.8%. Spontaneous deflation was seen in approximately 25%. Higher complication rates were found in transgender patients after neophallus creation and the two-piece IPP could offer better durability compared with the three-piece IPP. Longer operative times, greater use of advanced dilation techniques, and greater length loss also have been reported. Overall satisfaction rates are higher than 85%. CONCLUSION: The predominant etiology of ED for two-piece penile prosthesis placement is vasculogenic. There is a trend toward IPP insertion in patients after radical prostatectomy or who have spinal cord injury. The two-piece device has similar complication rates and high patient satisfaction scores compared with three-piece IPPs. Further larger prospective studies are needed to validate our findings, resolve discrepancies in published outcomes, and contribute to the sparse data on this subject. Ko OS, Bennett NE. Ambicor Two-Piece Inflatable Penile Prosthesis: Background and Contemporary Outcomes. Sex Med Rev 2018;6:319-327.

PREVALENCE AND TYPES OF GENDER-AFFIRMING SURGERY AMONG A SAMPLE OF TRANSGENDER ENDOCRINOLOGY PATIENTS PRIOR TO STATE EXPANSION OF INSURANCE COVERAGE.

OBJECTIVE: Transgender individuals now have many options for medical intervention, including gender-affirmation surgeries. However, it is unknown how common it is for transgender individuals to undergo these surgeries. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to assess the prevalence of gender-affirming surgeries among transgender patients in 2015, which was immediately prior to insurance changes that made gender-affirming surgery more affordable for Massachusetts residents. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 99 transgender patients was performed at the Endocrinology Clinic at Boston Medical Center, an urban safety net hospital. The records for 99 transgender subjects who received treatment between 2004-2015, including 28 transmen and 71 transwomen, were examined. The outcome measures were the types of medical interventions chosen by transgender patients, which included hormone therapy, chest surgery, gonadectomy, genital surgery, and facial surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-five percent of subjects had undergone at least one gender-affirming surgery. Transmen were more likely to have had surgery than transwomen (54% vs. 28%). Twenty-five percent of patients had chest surgery, 13% had genital surgery or gonadectomy, and 8% had facial surgery. CONCLUSION: In 2015, a majority of transgender endocrinology clinic patients had not undergone any type of gender-affirmation surgery. Among those who did elect to have a surgery, genital surgery or gonadectomy were uncommon. The low rate of surgery among this sample of transgender patients may be attributable to the financial cost, lack of interest in surgery, or that genital surgery is not a high priority for transgender individuals relative to surgery to change visible features such as face and chest. Abbreviation: HT = hormone therapy.

Impact of Surgeon Case Volume on Reoperation Rates after Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Surgery.

PURPOSE: We investigated the impact of surgeon annual case volume on reoperation rates after inflatable penile prosthesis surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was queried for inflatable penile prosthesis cases from 1995 to 2014. Multivariate proportional hazards regression was performed to estimate the impact of surgeon annual case volume on inflatable penile prosthesis reoperation rates. We stratified our analysis by indication for reoperation to determine if surgeon volume had a similar effect on infectious and noninfectious complications. RESULTS: A total of 14,969 men underwent inflatable penile prosthesis insertion. Median followup was 95.1 months (range 0.5 to 226.7) from the time of implant. The rates of overall reoperation, reoperation for infection and reoperation for noninfectious complications were 6.4%, 2.5% and 3.9%, respectively. Implants placed by lower volume implanters were more likely to require reoperation for infection but not for noninfectious complications. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that compared with patients treated by surgeons in the highest quartile of annual case volume (more than 31 cases per year), patients treated by surgeons in the lowest (0 to 2 cases per year), second (3 to 7 cases per year) and third (8 to 31 cases per year) annual case volume quartiles were 2.5 (p <0.001), 2.4 (p <0.001) and 2.1 (p=0.01) times more likely to require reoperation for inflatable penile prosthesis infection, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated by higher volume implanters are less likely to require reoperation after inflatable penile prosthesis insertion than those treated by lower volume surgeons. This trend appears to be driven by associations between surgeon volume and the risk of prosthesis infection.

Reoperation Rates for Penile Prosthetic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with erectile dysfunction refractory to medical treatment, placement of a penile prosthesis is an effective treatment option. Despite advancements in prosthetic design, it is not without complications requiring reoperation. AIM: To evaluate the long-term reoperation rate of penile prosthesis implantation. METHODS: A longitudinal analysis of the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from 1995 to 2010 was performed. Inclusion criteria were men who underwent their first penile prosthetic surgery. Patients were excluded if they underwent explantation of a prior prosthesis at the time of their first recorded surgery. Statistical analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier plot, hazard curve, and multivariate analysis adjusting for age, race, comorbidities, insurance status, hospital volume, and hospital teaching status. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was reoperation, specified as the removal or replacement of the prosthesis. RESULTS: In total, 7,666 patients (40,932 patient-years) were included in the study. The 5- and 10-year cumulative reoperation rates were 11.2% (CI = 10.5-12.0) and 15.7% (CI = 14.7-16.8), respectively. Malfunction and infection accounted for 57% and 27% of reoperations. Reoperation rate was highest at 1 year postoperatively and steadily decreased until 2 years postoperatively. Multivariate analysis showed higher rates of reoperation in younger men (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.51, CI = 1.12-2.05), African-American men (HR = 1.30, CI = 1.05-1.62), and Hispanic men (HR = 1.32, CI = 1.12-1.57). Of the reoperations, 22.9% were performed at a hospital different from the initial implantation. CONCLUSION: Reoperation rate for penile prosthetic surgery is highest in the first year postoperatively. Patients with the highest risk for reoperation were African-American, Hispanic, and younger men. Nearly one fourth of reoperations occurred at a hospital different from the initial surgery, suggesting the existing literature does not reflect the true prevalence of penile prosthetic complications.

Trends in the Utilization of Penile Prostheses in the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The utilization of penile prosthesis (PP) insertion in the general population for medically refractory erectile dysfunction (ED) has not been well-characterized. This study assessed the national temporal trends in the surgical management of ED utilizing PP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An analysis of the 5% Medicare Public Use Files from 2001 to 2010 was performed to assess the use of PP. Regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with PP placement, type of PP utilized, and factors associated with revisions. RESULTS: A total of 1,763,260 men were diagnosed with ED, 3% (53,180) of whom underwent PP insertion. The utilization of PP for ED decreased from 4.6% in 2002 to 2.3% in 2010 (P < 0.01). This temporal decline in utilization was significant across all demographic factors including age, ethnicity, and geographic location. Men aged 65-74, from the U.S. South and West, and those with Charlson comorbidity scores >1 were more likely to have a PP inserted for ED (P < 0.01). African American men were more likely to have a semirigid PP placed compared with a multicomponent inflatable PP, and were more likely to undergo a revision or removal of the PP compared with Caucasian men (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The surgical management of ED with PP changed significantly between 2001 and 2010. The overall utilization of PP decreased, but its use in patients with significant medical comorbidities increased. Age >65, ethnicity, and geography influenced the likelihood of PP placement, prosthesis type, as well as the likelihood of prosthesis removal or revision.

External validation of a prediction model for penile prosthesis implantation for erectile dysfunction management.

INTRODUCTION: Penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) is the definitive surgical treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED), yet it is often delayed for a variety of reasons. From commercial and Medicare claims data, we previously developed a tool for determining a patient's likelihood of eventually receiving PPI. We validated this instrument's utility by comparing cohorts receiving surgical (PPI) versus non-surgical ED management at a single institution. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The prediction model was based on a logistic regression incorporating claims data on demographics, comorbidities and ED therapy. A risk score is calculated from the model as the product of relative risks for the individual variables. The current validation was a retrospective analysis of ED patients seen at this institution from January to December 2012. Inclusion criteria included ED diagnosis and either first-time PPI or non-surgical treatment (controls). Risk scores for patients receiving PPI were compared to those of non-surgical controls. RESULTS: We established a cohort of 60 PPI patients (mean age 54.4 ± 9.5) and compared them with 120 non-PPI patients (mean age 53.4 ± 11.2 years). The median score of the PPI cohort was 5.7 (IQR 2.8-9.9) versus the non-PPI cohort's 1.8 (IQR 0.9-5.5) (p < 0.0001). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for predicting eventual PPI was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64-0.79) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The prediction model risk-stratified men who ultimately underwent PPI compared to non-surgically managed controls. This external validation study suggests that the prediction model may be used on an individual patient basis to support a recommendation of PPI for managing ED.

Prediction model for penile prosthesis implantation for erectile dysfunction management.

OBJECTIVE: Penile prosthesis surgery is indicated based on undesirability, contraindication or ineffectiveness of non-surgical options for erectile dysfunction. This definitive treatment is often delayed after initial diagnosis. Our objective was to develop a prediction tool based on a patient's clinical history to determine likelihood of ultimately receiving a penile prosthesis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis used claims data from Commercial and Medicare supplemental databases. Inclusion criteria were 18 years of age with 1 year of continuous enrollment at the first diagnosis of erectile dysfunction. Patients' demographics, co-morbidities and erectile dysfunction therapy were derived based on enrollment, medical and prescription histories. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Cox proportional hazards model with stepwise selection was used to identify and quantify (using relative risk) factors associated with a future penile prosthesis implant. Co-morbidities and therapies present prior to the index erectile dysfunction diagnosis were analyzed as fixed covariates. RESULTS: Approximately 1% of the dataset's population (N = 310,303 Commercial, N = 74,315 Medicare, respectively) underwent penile prosthesis implantation during the study period (3928 patients in the overall population: 2405 patients [0.78%] in the Commercial and 1523 patients [2.05%] in the Medicare population). Factors with the greatest predictive strength of penile prosthesis implantation included prostate cancer diagnosis (relative risk: 3.93, 2.29; 95% CI, 3.57-4.34, 2.03-2.6), diabetes mellitus (2.31, 1.23; 2.12-2.52, 1.1-1.37) and previous treatment with first-line therapy (1.39, 1.33; 1.28-1.5, 1.2-1.47) (all P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The presence and extent of specific medical history factors at the time of erectile dysfunction diagnosis predict an individual's future likelihood of penile prosthesis. Calculating the likelihood of penile prosthesis implantation based on the weight of these factors may assist clinicians with the definition of a care plan and patient counseling. The precision of the model may be limited by factors beyond medical history information that possibly influence the decision to proceed to surgery.

A population-based analysis of contemporary rates of reoperation for penile prosthesis procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a population-based comparison of inflatable vs semirigid penile prostheses and to determine contemporary rates of reoperation and identify factors impacting the type of prosthetic implanted. METHODS: Patient-level discharge data and revisit files from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for semirigid and inflatable prosthesis procedures performed for erectile dysfunction from 2006 to 2009 in the state of California were examined. Regression analysis was performed to determine differences between the procedures in terms of infectious and noninfectious failure. Regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with revision and to identify associations between potential risk factors and the type of implant performed. RESULTS: A total of 2263 cases were included in the study (1824 inflatable and 439 semirigid). The overall reoperation rate was 7.42%. There was no difference in the overall revision rate between the 2 groups (7.52% semirigid and 7.40% inflatable; P=.94). The reoperation rate secondary to infectious complications was 3.6% (4.5% semirigid vs 3.23% inflatable; P=.18). The revision rate secondary to noninfectious failure was 2.96% in the semirigid vs 4.17% in the inflatable group (P=.25). Medicaid insurance (odds ratio [OR], 2.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-3.61), African American race (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.20-2.49), age>80 (P=.046), and diabetes (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.07-2.59) were associated with receiving a semirigid implant. CONCLUSION: Reoperation rates for infectious and noninfectious failure are equivalent between the semirigid and inflatable penile prostheses. Sociodemographic factors appear to significantly influence the type of prosthesis a patient receives.

Modern utilization of penile prosthesis surgery: a national claim registry analysis.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the modern utilization of penile prosthesis surgery based on data derived from national claim databases and contrast to an analysis of patients similarly treated at an academic center during a contemporaneous period. A retrospective claim analysis utilizing a national database (MarketScan, Thomson Reuters) was performed for Commercial insurer and Medicare databases between January 2000 and March 2011. A retrospective analysis of contemporaneous penile prosthesis implantation at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) was done. Population demographics, comorbidities, previous (ED) therapies and time from ED diagnosis to surgery were assessed. Median ages for patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation were 58, 70 and 63 years for the Commercial, Medicare and JHH cohorts, respectively. For the claim databases (Commercial, Medicare, respectively), hypertension (72%, 78%), dyslipidemia (71%, 56%) and diabetes mellitus (45%, 40%) were predominant comorbidities, whereas for the JHH database prostate cancer (51%) and its management by prostatectomy (45%) or radiation (12%) were predominant. Previous use of PDE5 inhibitors was similar across databases (60, 58 and 69% for Commercial, Medicare and JHH cohorts, respectively), although previous use of non-oral ED therapies was greater in the JHH database. Median time to surgery from initial ED diagnosis was 2, 2 and 4 years for the Commercial, Medicare and JHH patients, respectively. Demographic variables and ED risk factors associated with penile prosthesis surgery at a national population-based level over a contemporary period were defined. Some differences in utilization trends of penile prosthesis surgery exist at a single institutional level.