Rutul D Patel1, Martin S Gross2. 1. Montefiore Medical Center Department of Urology, Bronx, NY, USA. 2. Section of Urology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA.
This paper provides an excellent review of previous literature regarding penile implant biofilms (1). Leong et al. astutely describe the shift in microbes responsible for biofilm formation in the era of antibiotic-coated implants from skin flora to more diverse and virulent organisms. Given the limited literature available, the authors also outline how urologists can replicate strategies used in other surgical fields to prevent biofilm formation (2).Infection remains the most feared complication of penile implants for both patients and surgeons. With that in mind, perhaps the most notable aspect of this scoping review is how few studies met inclusion criteria. Of the 11 studies the authors included, only 3 explicitly reported the number of biofilms identified. The remaining 8 simply mentioned culturing biofilms if present. This thorough analysis of the available literature should ultimately serve as a clarion call for more robust studies on this subject.The article’s supplementary files as