RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To create a society position statement on common adjunct penile prosthesis (PP) procedures. While the Medicare Current Procedural Terminology code book lists descriptions of procedures, it is very brief and lacks detail in the small subspecialty of prosthetic urology. At educational/research meetings, wide variation was found in how experts in prosthetic urology code the same procedures, and need for a standardized format in billing common ancillary surgery was voiced. METHODS: A subcommittee within the Society of Urologic Prosthetic Surgeons developed a survey assessing coding options for several procedures commonly adjunct to PP placement, which was distributed in the fall of 2022. The results of the survey were used to develop consensus statements on coding adjunct PP procedures; statements were distributed among society membership and meetings for approval. RESULTS: Thirty members replied to the survey; demographics were obtained as follows: 73% were trained in a fellowship, 50% identified as university/academic practitioners, and 50% in community/private practice; and 63% respondents place more than 50 implants annually. Only 1 of the 30 respondents stated confidence in coding for these ancillary procedures. Specifically, differences in how to code curvature correction procedures were observed throughout the survey results. CONCLUSION: Only 1 in 30 prosthetic urologists expressed confidence in coding and billing of adjunct PP procedures, further confirming the need for a society position statement. Therefore, we generated a consensus society position statement on common surgeries that are adjunct to PP placement.
Asunto(s)
Implantación de Pene , Prótesis de Pene , Sociedades Médicas , Urología , Masculino , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Codificación Clínica/normas , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
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.