Erectile Function Significant Enough for Penetration During Sexual Intercourse after Removal of Inflatable Penile Prosthesis

Treatment of Penile Prosthesis Implant's Infection

INTRODUCTION

Penile prosthesis implant is a safe and effective option in erectile dysfunction patients, being implant procedures safe with a low risk of infection. However, when infection occurs, it represents a concrete problem for both surgeon and patient.

METHODS

This is a comprehensive review of all issues relating to prosthesis infection, including causes and risk factors, methods of prevention, and management. We analyzed all preoperative and perioperative factors, which can play a role in infection of the device.

RESULTS

Infection of penile prosthesis implant is hard to manage and correct. While the incidence of infection following first implant is up to 3%, in cases of re-implant surgery, the rate can reach as high as 18%. Many articles were found addressing prevention and treatment of penile prosthesis infection, and many analyzed all relevant pre- and perioperative factors associated with penile prosthesis implant. Although such factors have been well studied, there is no clear consensus worldwide on certain topics.

CONCLUSIONS

Penile prosthesis implant is a safe and effective option. Despite infection is a rare event, surgeons should follow strictly pre-, intra- and postoperative recommendations in order to reduce the risk of device's infection. An appropriate antibiotic therapy should be tailored on patient's characteristics and pathogens isolated.

Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio as a predictor of early penile prosthesis implant infection

PURPOSE

To investigate the predictive value of preoperative serum neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) on the development of postoperative infections in patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation (PPI).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of 361 patients who underwent PPI over a 4-year period with at least 1-year follow-up. Demographics, blood results, and postoperative 1-year complications were recorded. Recommended cutoff values of NLR for early postoperative infectious complications were determined using receiver operating characteristic analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients with the mean age of 56.4 ± 8 years were included in the study. Mean follow-up time was 56.7 ± 30.4 months (12-108 months). Early postoperative infectious complications were occured in 18 patients (11.8%). These infections were prosthesis infection in 8 patients (5.2%), wound infection in 6 patients (3.9%), and urinary tract infection in 4 patients (2.6%). All these complications were occured within the first year of the surgery. Mean NLR was statistically higher in patients with postoperative complications when compared with uncomplicated cases (7.2 ± 3.9 vs. 2.2 ± 1.4, p < 0.001, respectively) Using a cut point of 6.2, preoperative NLR predicted postoperative complications with a sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 99%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to investigate the relationship between NLR and early postoperative infection as a complication of PPI. The results demonstrated that the NLR value could be a potential laboratory parameter for predicting early postoperative infectious complications in patients undergoing PPI.