PD20-02 SAFETY OF SYNCHRONOUS PENILE PROSTHESIS AND ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTER IMPLANTATION

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Surgical Therapy I (PD20)1 Apr 2020PD20-02 SAFETY OF SYNCHRONOUS PENILE PROSTHESIS AND ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTER IMPLANTATION Eric Kirshenbaum*, Parth Patel, Marc Nelson, Petar Bajic, Kevin McVary, Larissa Bresler, Ahmer Farooq, and Christopher Gonzalez Eric Kirshenbaum*Eric Kirshenbaum* More articles by this author , Parth PatelParth Patel More articles by this author , Marc NelsonMarc Nelson More articles by this author , Petar BajicPetar Bajic More articles by this author , Kevin McVaryKevin McVary More articles by this author , Larissa BreslerLarissa Bresler More articles by this author , Ahmer FarooqAhmer Farooq More articles by this author , and Christopher GonzalezChristopher Gonzalez More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000870.02AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Synchronous penile prosthesis (PP) and artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) and stress urinary incontinence allows for avoidance of a secondary surgical procedure, however the safety of this approach has been challenged by existing literature. We sought to determine whether synchronous PP and AUS implantation increases the risk of intraoperative, perioperative, or postoperative complications. METHODS: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and Ambulatory Databases for California (2007-2011) and Florida (2009-2014) were utilized. Patients were identified as having undergone AUS, IPP or combined AUS/IPP by ICD-9 and CPT codes. Baseline patient characteristics were assessed. We compared outcomes in patients undergoing combination AUS/PP versus those undergoing PP or AUS alone. Outcomes of interest include 90-day readmissions, 90-day ER visits, surgical complications, and 90-day device complications. RESULTS: A total of 20,593 patients were identified who underwent PP or AUS, 245 of whom underwent combined PP and AUS. Patients undergoing prosthesis placement primarily had Medicare insurance and were Caucasian. Patients undergoing AUS placement alone were older (70.5 years), compared to IPP alone (65.7 years) or synchronous (67.2 years). Patients undergoing a synchronous procedure had higher 90-day readmission rates compared to PP or AUS alone (13.9% vs 7.2%, p<0.001). Additionally, patients undergoing a synchronous procedure had higher rates of device complications within 90 days (6.1% vs 3.4%, p=0.021). Lastly, patients undergoing a combined PP and AUS procedure were more likely to have minor/moderate complications (8.89% vs 2.35%, p<0.001). No significant difference was seen in the rate of ER visits within 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: Synchronous PP and AUS implantation is feasible, but is associated with higher readmission rates, 90-day device complications and surgical complications. Caution should be considered in this higher risk population. Source of Funding: None © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e447-e447 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Eric Kirshenbaum* More articles by this author Parth Patel More articles by this author Marc Nelson More articles by this author Petar Bajic More articles by this author Kevin McVary More articles by this author Larissa Bresler More articles by this author Ahmer Farooq More articles by this author Christopher Gonzalez More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...