Michelle Christodoulidou1, Ian Pearce2. 1. 1 University of Edinburgh , Edinburgh Surgical Sciences Qualification, Edinburgh, United Kingdom . 2. 2 Urology Department, Central Manchester University Hospitals , Manchester, United Kingdom .
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Controversy still exists in some centers on whether diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for penile prosthesis infection. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence correlating penile implant infections to the presence of diabetes mellitus in patients with organic erectile dysfunction. METHODS: We performed a systematic review searching through Medline database from 1960 to 2014, using keywords; penile prosthesis(es), penile implant(s), and diabetes mellitus. We used the Prisma 2009 Flow diagram for systematic reviews. Thirty-eight publications were selected for inclusion in this qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Most case series reporting a greater infection rate in patients with diabetes mellitus date from the 1970s to 1990s. These series reported an infection rate of 5.5 to 20% and contained small cohort of patients. In the 1990s larger case series reported a lower infection rate in patients with diabetes mellitus compared with patients with paraplegia, pelvic trauma, and patients on steroids, but still reported an infection rate as high as 10.6%. With the implementation of antibiotic coated implants in 2001, infection rates reduced further with reported rates becoming less than 2% in patients with diabetes mellitus. The latest and largest case series by Eid et al. (2012) reported an infection rate of 0.46% with antibiotic coated implants and "no touch" technique in a cohort of 1511 cases, out of which 41% were patients with diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSION: Strong evidence exists that the risk of penile prosthesis infection has reduced over the decades with device improvement and surgical expertise. In larger case series infection rates in patients with diabetes mellitus is not statistically significant from that experiences in the population at large.
BACKGROUND: Controversy still exists in some centers on whether diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for penile prosthesis infection. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence correlating penile implant infections to the presence of diabetes mellitus in patients with organic erectile dysfunction. METHODS: We performed a systematic review searching through Medline database from 1960 to 2014, using keywords; penile prosthesis(es), penile implant(s), and diabetes mellitus. We used the Prisma 2009 Flow diagram for systematic reviews. Thirty-eight publications were selected for inclusion in this qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Most case series reporting a greater infection rate in patients with diabetes mellitus date from the 1970s to 1990s. These series reported an infection rate of 5.5 to 20% and contained small cohort of patients. In the 1990s larger case series reported a lower infection rate in patients with diabetes mellitus compared with patients with paraplegia, pelvic trauma, and patients on steroids, but still reported an infection rate as high as 10.6%. With the implementation of antibiotic coated implants in 2001, infection rates reduced further with reported rates becoming less than 2% in patients with diabetes mellitus. The latest and largest case series by Eid et al. (2012) reported an infection rate of 0.46% with antibiotic coated implants and "no touch" technique in a cohort of 1511 cases, out of which 41% were patients with diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSION: Strong evidence exists that the risk of penile prosthesis infection has reduced over the decades with device improvement and surgical expertise. In larger case series infection rates in patients with diabetes mellitus is not statistically significant from that experiences in the population at large.
Authors: Giuseppe Defeudis; Rossella Mazzilli; Marta Tenuta; Giovanni Rossini; Virginia Zamponi; Soraya Olana; Antongiulio Faggiano; Paolo Pozzilli; Andrea M Isidori; Daniele Gianfrilli Journal: Diabetes Metab Res Rev Date: 2021-09-21 Impact factor: 8.128
Authors: Mahmoud I Khalil; Austin K Bramwell; Naleen Raj Bhandari; Nalin Payakachat; Bruno Machado; Rodney Davis; Mohamed H Kamel; Ahmed Safaan; Omer A Raheem Journal: World J Mens Health Date: 2020-04-21 Impact factor: 5.400