A systematic review of penile prosthesis infection and meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus role.

BACKGROUND: Infection is the most feared complication of a penile prosthesis. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is widely known to increase the risk of several infections, but its role in the penile prosthesis is still controversial. This systematic review aims to show the contemporary scenario of penile prosthesis infection and present a meta-analysis about DM contribution to penile prosthesis infection. METHODS: The review was performed with no language or time limitation, including ten databases. The included articles were about the male population who received a penile prosthesis with no model restriction, with a minimum follow up of 1 year, and outcomes adequately reported. RESULTS: The mean infection incidence of penile prosthesis ranged from 0.33 to 11.4%. In early 2000, the general incidence of infection was 3 to 5%, then, the introduction of coated materials decreased it to 0.3 to 2.7%. The meta-analysis showed that diabetes mellitus is related to an increased risk of penile prosthesis infection with an odds ratio of 1.53 (95% CI 1.15-2.04). CONCLUSIONS: Penile prosthesis infection decreased in the last decades but remains a significant cause of reoperation, and it is related to lower prosthesis survival. Meta-analysis concludes that diabetes mellitus is related to a higher risk of penile prosthesis infection.

Proposal of a new way to evaluate the external sphincter function prior male sling surgey

ABSTRACT Objective: To propose a new way to objectively evaluate the external sphincter function prior to male sling surgery. Materials and Methods: We evaluated the pre-operative sphincter function throughout sphincter pressure at rest (SPAR) and sphincter pressure under contraction (SPUC) obtained throughout urethral profilometry profile (UPP) of 10 consecutive patients (age range, 54-79 years) treated with the retrourethral transobturator sling (RTS) for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) because of prostate surgery. The primary endpoint for surgery success rate was post-operative pad weight test. This was correlated to pre-operative pad test, RT, SPAR and SPUC. Post-operatively patients were classified as continent (no pad use) and those who still were incontinent. Results: Mean SPUC in the continent and incontinent group was respectively 188 + 8.8 (median 185.1, range 181 to 201) and 96.9 + 49.4 (median 109.9, range 35.6 to 163.6) (P = 0.008). Mean 24-hour pad test was 151 + 84.2gm (median 140, range 80 to 245) and 973 + 337.1gm (median 1940, range 550 to 1200) in post-operative continent and incontinent groups respectively (P = 0.008). The repositioning test (RT) was positive in all continent patients except one. The RT was also positive in three incontinence patients (false positive). In all post-operative continent patients SPUC was higher than 180cmH2O and pre-operative pad test was less than 245gm. Conclusions: SPUC seems to be a way for optimizing the sphincter evaluation as well to become a useful tool for patient selection prior to RTS surgery.

Proposal of a new way to evaluate the external sphincter function prior male sling surgey.

OBJECTIVE: To propose a new way to objectively evaluate the external sphincter function prior to male sling surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the pre-operative sphincter function throughout sphincter pressure at rest (SPAR) and sphincter pressure under contraction (SPUC) obtained throughout urethral profilometry profile (UPP) of 10 consecutive patients (age range, 54-79 years) treated with the retrourethral transobturator sling (RTS) for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) because of prostate surgery. The primary endpoint for surgery success rate was post-operative pad weight test. This was correlated to preoperative pad test, RT, SPAR and SPUC. Post-operatively patients were classified as continent (no pad use) and those who still were incontinent. RESULTS: Mean SPUC in the continent and incontinent group was respectively 188 + 8.8 (median 185.1, range 181 to 201) and 96.9 + 49.4 (median 109.9, range 35.6 to 163.6) (P = 0.008). Mean 24-hour pad test was 151 + 84.2gm (median 140, range 80 to 245) and 973 + 337.1gm (median 1940, range 550 to 1200) in post-operative continent and incontinent groups respectively (P = 0.008). The repositioning test (RT) was positive in all continent patients except one. The RT was also positive in three incontinence patients (false positive). In all post-operative continent patients SPUC was higher than 180cmH2O and pre-operative pad test was less than 245gm. CONCLUSIONS: SPUC seems to be a way for optimizing the sphincter evaluation as well to become a useful tool for patient selection prior to RTS surgery.

Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical practice of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) treatment in Brazil in relation to international guidelines: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU), European Association of Urology (EAU) and American Urological Association (AUA). METHODS: Cross-sectional study using questionnaires about urological practice on treatment of NMIBC during the 32nd Brazilian Congress of Urology. A total of 650 question forms were answered. RESULTS: There were 73% of complete answers (total of 476 question forms). In total, 246 urologists (51.68%) lived in the southeast region and 310 (65.13%) treat 1 to 3 cases of NMIBC per month. Low risk cancer: Only 35 urologists (7.5%) apply the single intravesical dose of immediate chemotherapy with Mitomicin C recommended by the above guidelines. Adjuvant therapy with BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR is used by 167 participants (35.1%) and 271 urologists (56.9%) use only TUR. High risk tumors: 397 urologists (83.4%) use adjuvant therapy, 375 (78.8%) use BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR, of which 306 (64.3%) referred the use for at least one year. Intravesical chemotherapy with Mitomicin C (a controversial recommendation) was used by 22 urologists (4.6%). BCG dose raised a lot of discrepancies. Induction doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 105 (22%), 193 (40.4%) and 54 (11.3%) respectively. Maintenance doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 190 (48.7%), 144 (37.0%) and 32 (8.2%) urologists, respectively. Schemes of administration were also varied and the one cited by SWOG protocol was the most used: 142 (29.8%). CONCLUSIONS: SBU, EAU and AUA guidelines are partially respected by Brazilian urologists, particularly in low risk tumors. In high risk tumors, concordance rates are comparable to international data. Further studies are necessary to fully understand the reasons of such disagreement.

Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer?

ABSTRACT Objectives To evaluate the clinical practice of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) treatment in Brazil in relation to international guidelines: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU), European Association of Urology (EAU) and American Urological Association (AUA). Materials and Methods Cross-sectional study using questionnaires about urological practice on treatment of NMIBC during the 32nd Brazilian Congress of Urology. A total of 650 question forms were answered. Results There were 73% of complete answers (total of 476 question forms). In total, 246 urologists (51.68%) lived in the southeast region and 310 (65.13%) treat 1 to 3 cases of NMIBC per month. Low risk cancer: Only 35 urologists (7.5%) apply the single intravesical dose of immediate chemotherapy with Mitomicin C recommended by the above guidelines. Adjuvant therapy with BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR is used by 167 participants (35.1%) and 271 urologists (56.9%) use only TUR. High risk tumors: 397 urologists (83.4%) use adjuvant therapy, 375 (78.8%) use BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR, of which 306 (64.3%) referred the use for at least one year. Intravesical chemotherapy with Mitomicin C (a controversial recommendation) was used by 22 urologists (4.6%). BCG dose raised a lot of discrepancies. Induction doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 105 (22%), 193 (40.4%) and 54 (11.3%) respectively. Maintenance doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 190 (48.7%), 144 (37.0%) and 32 (8.2%) urologists, respectively. Schemes of administration were also varied and the one cited by SWOG protocol was the most used: 142 (29.8%). Conclusion SBU, EAU and AUA guidelines are partially respected by Brazilian urologists, particularly in low risk tumors. In high risk tumors, concordance rates are comparable to international data. Further studies are necessary to fully understand the reasons of such disagreement.