1223 POSITIVE CULTURE GROWTHS FROM INFECTION-RETARDANT COATED PENILE PROSTHESES AT THE TIME OF REVISION / SAVLAGE SURGERY: A MULTICENTER STUDY

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction/Andrology: Evaluation (I)1 Apr 20131223 POSITIVE CULTURE GROWTHS FROM INFECTION-RETARDANT COATED PENILE PROSTHESES AT THE TIME OF REVISION / SAVLAGE SURGERY: A MULTICENTER STUDY Gerard Henry, Chris Smith, Steven Wilson, John Delk, Mario Cleves, Caroline Jennermann, and Culley Carson Gerard HenryGerard Henry Shreveport, LA More articles by this author , Chris SmithChris Smith Shreveport, LA More articles by this author , Steven WilsonSteven Wilson Palm Springs, CA More articles by this author , John DelkJohn Delk Little Rock, AR More articles by this author , Mario ClevesMario Cleves Little Rock, AR More articles by this author , Caroline JennermannCaroline Jennermann Shreveport, LA More articles by this author , and Culley CarsonCulley Carson Chapel Hill, NC More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.2577AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The majority of penile prostheses have culture positive bacteria at the time of revision surgery (J Urol 172: 153). METHODS At 4 institutions, more than 300 patients with a penile prosthesis underwent revision surgery between November 2000 and July 2012. Only those patients who already had infection retardant-coated penile prostheses placed and grew out positive culture isolates were included in the study. Patients were further broken down into two groups: clinically uninfected revision / replacement (group 1 =67) and overtly infected undergoing salvage rescue or removal (group 2 =13). In addition, sensitivities to the combination of tetracycline and rifampin were evaluated (sensitive = sens; resistant = R). RESULTS A total of 43 isolates were cultured out these patients from group 1 and 18 from group 2; some patients grew out more than one isolate. Culture positive isolates from the clinically uninfected revisions (group 1) were 23 S. Epi (all sens), 5 S. Lugdenesis (all sens), 3 S. Haemolyicus (all sens), 2 S. aureus (Pan - sens), 2 S. capitis - ureolyticus (sens), 2 enterococcus faecalis (1 sens, 1intermediate sens), Klebsiella pneumonia (sens), Streptococcus Mitis (sens), 2 aerobic diphtheroids, Candida Albicans, and budding yeast. Culture positive isolates from overtly infected patients (group 2) were 4 S. Epi (all sens), 2 MRSA (sens), 2 Enterococcus Faecalis (sens), S. Haemolyicus, S. Warneri, Candida Albicans, E. Coli (tetracycline R), Citrobacter Freudii (R to rifampin), Klebsiella Pneumonia (sens), Micrococcus species (sens), Peptostreptococcus species (sens), Gram + rods, and Streptococcus Agalactieae (sens). CONCLUSIONS Culture isolates grown from patients undergoing revision surgery for clinically uninfected (group 1) reasons appear to have a more traditional bacteria profile; meanwhile, those patients with overt infections (group 2) may have a non-traditional bacterial profile. © 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 189Issue 4SApril 2013Page: e501 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Gerard Henry Shreveport, LA More articles by this author Chris Smith Shreveport, LA More articles by this author Steven Wilson Palm Springs, CA More articles by this author John Delk Little Rock, AR More articles by this author Mario Cleves Little Rock, AR More articles by this author Caroline Jennermann Shreveport, LA More articles by this author Culley Carson Chapel Hill, NC More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...