MP39-02 PERIOPERATIVE MORBIDITY OF PENILE PROSTHESIS PLACEMENT WITH CONCURRENT SURGERY. A NATIONAL REPORT

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Surgical Therapy II (MP39)1 Apr 2020MP39-02 PERIOPERATIVE MORBIDITY OF PENILE PROSTHESIS PLACEMENT WITH CONCURRENT SURGERY. A NATIONAL REPORT Omer Raheem*, Mahmoud I. Khalil, Mahip Acharya, Nalin Payakachat, Bruno Machado, Ayad Yousef, and Rodney Davis Omer Raheem*Omer Raheem* More articles by this author , Mahmoud I. KhalilMahmoud I. Khalil More articles by this author , Mahip AcharyaMahip Acharya More articles by this author , Nalin PayakachatNalin Payakachat More articles by this author , Bruno MachadoBruno Machado More articles by this author , Ayad Yousef Ayad Yousef More articles by this author , and Rodney Davis Rodney Davis More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000888.02AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: There is always a concern whether performing concurrent surgery along with penile prosthesis (PP) placement may increase the risk of complications specifically postoperative infection. Contemporary reports on perioperative morbidity of PP placement with concurrent surgery are scarce. This study assessed the 30-day postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing insertion of PP with concurrent surgery utilizing the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). METHODS: The NSQIP database (2007-2016) was queried to identify males who underwent placement of PP combined with other procedures. Patient demographics, postoperative morbidity including complications, readmission and reoperation rates were extracted and compared between the two groups. Student t test and Chi-square or Fischer’s exact test were used as appropriate. RESULTS: 142 patients were identified and included in the study. The most prevalent concurrent procedures with IPP placement were surgical correction of Peyronie’s disease by plication or grafting (n=54, 38%), insertion of artificial urinary sphincter (n=27, 19%), repair of inguinal or abdominal hernia (n=25, 17.6%), and insertion of male sling (n=14, 12.6%). A majority of patients were white (65.5%), aged 60-69 (42.9%) and received the combined procedure in 2016 (30.3%). Fifty percent of patients were ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) class I/II and the rest were class III-V. Mean body mass index (±SD) was 30.1±4.8 kg/m2. Mean operating time (±SD) and length of stay (±SD) were 139.4±62.7 minutes and 2.0±1.0 days, respectively. Overall, postoperative complications occurred in 7 patients (4.9%) only. Specifically, there were urinary tract infection (n=4, 2.8%), superficial surgical site infection (n=2, 1.4%) and unplanned intubation (n=1, 0.7%). Similarly, reoperation and readmission rates were low (n=1, 0.7% and n=4, 2.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Overall the 30-day postoperative morbidity, reoperation and readmission rates of PP insertion with concurrent surgery were low. The majority of the reported complications were minor. Concurrent surgery with PP insertion does not seem to significantly increase the risk of postoperative morbidity. Nevertheless, future prospective studies to confirm our results are warranted. Source of Funding: None © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e577-e577 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Omer Raheem* More articles by this author Mahmoud I. Khalil More articles by this author Mahip Acharya More articles by this author Nalin Payakachat More articles by this author Bruno Machado More articles by this author Ayad Yousef More articles by this author Rodney Davis More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...