Literature DB >> 21951338

Biofilm and penile prosthesis infections in the era of coated implants: a review.

Steven K Wilson1, J William Costerton.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The numbers of inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implanted has increased yearly due to the large numbers of patients treated for prostate cancer, patients becoming refractory to the five phosphodiesterase inhibitors and Peyronie's disease. AIM: Prosthesis implantation can be associated with a variety of complications with device infection being the most dreaded one. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: An understanding of the pathogenesis of these infections is necessary to allow the surgeon to plan treatment.
METHODS: Infection begins with colonization of planktonic bacteria in the implant space. Biofilm forms around the bacterial mass within 48 hours. Bacteria in biofilm have reduced growth rates, may change phenotypically, and develop resistance to drugs. Antibiotics and the body's macrophages will kill the planktonic bacteria released from the biofilm but never eliminate the infecting organisms. This review will delineate present thinking on infection prevention and biofilm's role in device infection. IPP infection before and after the coated implants will be characterized. Future ideas for prevention and treatment of infection will be explored.
RESULTS: The coated implants have reduced the incidence of IPP infections. The bacteria that cause the majority of infections in the era of the coated implant seem to have changed from predominantly nosocomial coagulase-negative Staphylococcus to more virulent organisms. Device infection requires new paradigms of prevention and treatment strategy because the infecting bacteria are different and the patients are sicker.
CONCLUSIONS: The problem of infection is considerably decreased with coated IPP, yet those infections that do occur are systemic in nature and seem to be caused by more aggressive organisms. These infections are not usually amenable to salvage because the virulence of the bacteria. Future research to prevent these infections must be directed to magnifying the effective dosage of antibiotics to penetrate the biofilm or eliminating the bacteria's ability to secrete the slime.
© 2011 International Society for Sexual Medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21951338     DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02428.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sex Med        ISSN: 1743-6095            Impact factor:   3.802


  22 in total

Review 1.  Current Status for Semirigid Penile Prosthetic Devices.

Authors:  Raul E Fernandez-Crespo; Kristina Buscaino; Justin Parker; Rafael Carrion
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  Damage Control Considerations During IPP Surgery.

Authors:  David Y Yang; Tobias S Kohler
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Significance of biofilm for the prosthetic surgeon.

Authors:  R Charles Welliver; Brittney L Hanerhoff; Gerard D Henry; Tobias S Köhler
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Conservative Therapy is an Effective Option in Patients With Localized Infection After Penile Implant Surgery.

Authors:  Mohamad Habous; Mohammed Farag; Ben Williamson; Osama Laban; Saad Mahmoud; Osama Abdelwahab; Mohamed Elkhouly; Usama Kamil; Saleh Binsaleh; Raanan Tal; David Ralph; John P Mulhall
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2016-05-06       Impact factor: 3.802

Review 5.  Minimizing Penile Prosthesis Implant Infection: What Can We Learn From Orthopedic Surgery?

Authors:  Selin Isguven; Paul H Chung; Priscilla Machado; Lauren J Delaney; Antonia F Chen; Flemming Forsberg; Noreen J Hickok
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 6.  Infection Prevention Considerations for Complex Penile Prosthesis Recipients.

Authors:  Robert J Carrasquillo; Ricardo M Munarriz; Martin S Gross
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Risk factors associated with penile prosthesis infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alejandro Carvajal; Johana Benavides; Herney Andrés García-Perdomo; Gerard D Henry
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 2.896

Review 8.  Penile implant infection prevention part II: device coatings have changed the game.

Authors:  John J Mulcahy; Tobias S Köhler; Lexiaochuan Wen; Steven K Wilson
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2020-08-07       Impact factor: 2.896

Review 9.  Penile implant infection prevention part 1: what is fact and what is fiction? Wilson's Workshop #9.

Authors:  Tobias S Köhler; Lexiaochuan Wen; Steven K Wilson
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 2.896

10.  In vitro determination of the antibiotic susceptibility of biofilm-forming Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus: possible role of proteolytic activity and membrane lipopolysaccharide.

Authors:  Majed M Masadeh; Nizar M Mhaidat; Karem H Alzoubi; Emad I Hussein; Esra'a I Al-Trad
Journal:  Infect Drug Resist       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 4.003

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.