Literature DB >> 26343986

The Malleable Implant Salvage Technique: Infection Outcomes after Mulcahy Salvage Procedure and Replacement of Infected Inflatable Penile Prosthesis with Malleable Prosthesis.

Martin S Gross1, Elizabeth A Phillips2, Alejandra Balen2, J Francois Eid3, Christopher Yang4, Ross Simon4, Daniel Martinez4, Rafael Carrion4, Paul Perito5, Laurence Levine6, Jason Greenfield7, Ricardo Munarriz2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Since its introduction in 1996 Mulcahy salvage has significantly improved outcomes for the removal and replacement of infected inflatable penile prostheses. Long-term followup data of Mulcahy salvage show an infection-free rate of 82%. A multicenter retrospective analysis of the malleable implant salvage technique was conducted to assess infection outcomes and the feasibility of conversion from malleable device back to inflatable penile prosthesis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective, institutional review board exempt, multi-institution study of 58 patients who underwent Mulcahy salvage with inflatable penile prosthesis removal and replacement with malleable prosthesis. Patient operative notes and charts were extensively reviewed to compile study data.
RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2014 a total of 58 patients underwent infected inflatable penile prosthesis removal and replacement with a malleable prosthesis via Mulcahy salvage. Of these patients 54 (93%) have remained infection-free postoperatively. Average patient age was 56.4 years and average operative time was 148 minutes. Postoperative followup (as of May 2015) ranged from 1 month to 84 months. Of the 54 patients 37 retained the malleable prosthesis and 17 (31%) subsequently underwent replacement with an inflatable penile prosthesis. This occurred on average 6.7 months after Mulcahy salvage. Four patients had persistent infection after Mulcahy salvage with the malleable prosthesis and underwent explantation.
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis of Mulcahy salvage procedure and replacement of inflatable penile prosthesis with malleable prosthesis shows a high infection-free rate. Additionally, 17 of the 54 patients who remained infection-free were able to successfully undergo subsequent removal of the malleable prosthesis and replacement with an inflatable penile prosthesis. Further prospective studies are needed to compare salvage with malleable vs inflatable penile prosthesis.
Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  erectile dysfunction; infection; penile prosthesis; salvage therapy

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26343986     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.08.091

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  14 in total

Review 1.  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 2.  Surgical tips in difficult penile prosthetic surgery: a narrative review.

Authors:  Nicolò Schifano; Paolo Capogrosso; Onur Omer Cakir; Federico Dehò; Giulio Garaffa
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2022-10-19       Impact factor: 2.408

Review 3.  Penile Implant Considerations in the Bladder Cancer Survivor.

Authors:  Jeffrey C Loh-Doyle
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Scrotal Abscess Precipitating Late Infection of a Malleable Penile Prosthesis: The Risk Never Evanesces.

Authors:  Osama Mustafa; Sultan Althakafi; Said Kattan; Mohamed Kattan; Naif AlHathal
Journal:  Case Rep Urol       Date:  2016-02-04

Review 5.  Salvage penile prosthetic surgery utilizing temporary malleable implants.

Authors:  Michael Lao; R James Graydon; Jared M Bieniek
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-11

6.  The importance of the malleable implant salvage technique (MIST) in modern prosthetic urology.

Authors:  Alex Tatem; Jason R Kovac
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-11

Review 7.  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 8.  Narrative review of penile prosthetic implant technology and surgical results, including transgender patients.

Authors:  Michael Polchert; Brian Dick; Omer Raheem
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-06

Review 9.  A review of surgical strategies for penile prosthesis implantation in patients with Peyronie's disease.

Authors:  James Anaissie; Faysal A Yafi
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2016-06

Review 10.  The penoscrotal surgical approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement.

Authors:  Nikhil K Gupta; Josh Ring; Landon Trost; Steven K Wilson; Tobias S Köhler
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.