Faculty Bibliography

Collagenase clostridium histolyticum (CCH, Xiaflex, Xiapex) is the only FDA-approved medication for treatment of Peyronie's disease. It is unclear how practitioners actually use CCH in their own practices. The objectives of the study were: (1) to identify variability in practice patterns for CCH among practitioners, (2) to assess adherence to the package insert instructions, and (3) to evaluate whether provider satisfaction was associated with adherence to instructions. A 30-question online survey was distributed to 1270 members of the International Society for Sexual Medicine (ISSM) from the EU, USA, Canada and Australia. Of the 30 questions, 10 survey questions had only one response consistent with the CCH package insert recommendations. An "adherence" score was calculated for each survey participant depending on how many of these questions were answered correctly. The average adherence scores of various groups were compared using a student's t-test. A chi-squared test was used to determine association between categorical variables. Of 202 total responses, 132 practitioners reported using CCH out of 1270 ISSM members from countries where CCH is available (10.4% response rate). Practitioners from outside the USA were more likely to be satisfied with CCH (p = 0.006), and more experienced users (>20 uses) were more likely to be satisfied than less experienced users (<10 uses) (p = 0.046). Satisfied users of CCH did not have significantly different adherence scores than non-satisfied users. Even though 67% of practitioners believed they followed the package insert guidelines, only 11% adhered to all the recommendations evaluated by the survey. Treatment adherence to package insert guidelines does not appear to be associated with provider satisfaction. We believe there is utility in seeing a snapshot of these practice patterns so practitioners may feel more comfortable adapting their own practice in light of newer data supporting alternative administration methods.

BACKGROUND:Removal of the penile prosthesis reservoir can be technically challenging because of its difficult locations either deep in the pelvis or high in the abdominal wall. AIM:To describe a detailed surgical technique for reservoir removal through a penoscrotal approach. METHODS:We describe our preferred method for removal of prosthetic reservoir and present a retrospective review of patient outcomes after reservoir removal. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:Primary outcomes included immediate or late complications. Secondary outcomes included operative time. RESULTS:34 patients underwent reservoir removal with the use of our described technique. 23 patients (67.6%) had reservoirs removed because of device malfunction and 11 (32.4%) because of infection. A total of 18 reservoirs (52.9%) were found in the space of Retzius (SOR), whereas the other 16 (47.1%) were in an alternative/ectopic space. 2 cases (5.9%) required a counterincision to remove the reservoir. Mean overall operative time was 96.2 minutes (range 35-175). There were no complications in this series. There was no statistical difference in operative time between reservoirs removed because of malfunction when compared with infection (P = .283). However, there was a difference in operative time between reservoirs removed from the SOR when compared with those removed from an ectopic space, with mean operating room times of 104.5 and 75.4 minutes, respectively (P = .001). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS:Reservoir removal through a penoscrotal incision is feasible and safe. STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS:This is the first report, to our knowledge, describing surgical techniques and outcomes for reservoir removal. Limitations include its retrospective nature and lack of validated questionnaires to assess patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION:Although removal of a reservoir deep in the SOR or placed in alternate/ectopic locations can be challenging, the use of a lighted retractor, meticulous dissection, and a few technical maneuvers described allow for safe removal of the reservoir completely intact while avoiding complications. Our technique for a secondary incision in particularly difficult cases is also described. Clavell-Hernández J, Aly SG, Wang R, et al. Penile Prosthesis Reservoir Removal: Surgical Description and Patient Outcomes. J Sex Med 2019;16:146-152.

PURPOSE:The purpose of this guideline is to provide a clinical strategy for the diagnosis and treatment of erectile dysfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A systematic review of the literature using the Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases (search dates 1/1/1965 to 7/29/17) was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to the diagnosis and treatment of erectile dysfunction. Evidence-based statements were based on body of evidence strength Grade A, B, or C and were designated as Strong, Moderate, and Conditional Recommendations with additional statements presented in the form of Clinical Principles or Expert Opinions. RESULTS:The American Urological Association has developed an evidence-based guideline on the management of erectile dysfunction. This document is designed to be used in conjunction with the associated treatment algorithm. CONCLUSIONS:Using the shared decision-making process as a cornerstone for care, all patients should be informed of all treatment modalities that are not contraindicated, regardless of invasiveness or irreversibility, as potential first-line treatments. For each treatment, the clinician should ensure that the man and his partner have a full understanding of the benefits and risk/burdens associated with that choice.

[This corrects the article on p. 423 in vol. 58.].