Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A scoping review of penile implant biofilms-what do we know and what remains unknown?
Leong, Joon Yau; Capella, Courtney E; D'Amico, Maria J; Isguven, Selin; Purtill, Caroline; Machado, Priscilla; Delaney, Lauren J; Henry, Gerard D; Hickok, Noreen J; Forsberg, Flemming; Chung, Paul H.
Affiliation
  • Leong JY; Department of Urology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Capella CE; Department of Urology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • D'Amico MJ; Department of Urology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Isguven S; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Purtill C; Department of Radiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Machado P; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Delaney LJ; Department of Radiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Henry GD; Department of Radiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Hickok NJ; WK Advanced Urology, Bossier City, LA, USA.
  • Forsberg F; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Chung PH; Department of Radiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Transl Androl Urol ; 11(8): 1210-1221, 2022 Aug.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36092843
ABSTRACT

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.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Language: En Journal: Transl Androl Urol Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Language: En Journal: Transl Androl Urol Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States