(221) Outcomes of Transurethral Surgery After IPP
Authors: Vasylieva V , Henry G , Karpman E 
Published: February 2024

Abstract

Introduction
Inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) effectively restores erectile function with very high patient satisfaction rates. However, some patients may require subsequent treatments for urethral stricture, enlarged prostate and bladder tumors. These underlying conditions oftentimes coexist with erectile dysfunction (ED). Transurethral surgery (TUS) treatment of coexisting conditions in patients with IPP can be challenging and associated with a theoretical risk of mechanical injury and infection of the implant. There is a lack of literature reporting on IPP issues after TUS.

Objective
The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative outcomes in patients who underwent TUS following IPP placement.

Methods
After IRB approval, we reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent Greenlight laser enucleation of the prostate (GLEP)(Wolf© 26 Fr cystoscope), Rezum© vaporization ( 21 Fr delivery device), transurethral bladder tumor resection (TURBT)(21 and 22 Fr cystoscopes) and Optilume balloon dilation surgeries (19 Fr cystoscope and 24 Fr balloon) after IPP placement at our institution from 2014 to 2023. We excluded patients who underwent TUS prior to IPP placement and only included patients who had an in situ IPP at the time of the TUS procedure. Parameters such as IPSS score, PSA, postvoid residual volume (PVR) and transrectal ultrasound were used for assessment before and after surgery. All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon. Postoperative progress was assessed at multiple follow-up visits.

Results
Seven patients with IPP underwent eight TUS. Four patients (71%) received surgical BPH treatment, one patient was treated for bladder tumors and one patient developed a bladder neck contracture (BNC) after GLEP and required a second TUS. One patient developed a pendulous stricture after erosion from an IPP cylinder placed by a different surgeon 23 years prior. The patient underwent IPP removal and replacement at our facility 63 months prior to Optilume® balloon dilation. The mean time between IPP placement and TUS was 34.86 ± 30.96 months. The average prostate volume was 41.3 ± 25.9 mL, and the mean parameters of PVR, Maximum flow rate (Q max), IPSS, and PSA before surgery were 140.6 ± 100.8 mL, 8.4 ± 7.2 ml/s, 16.3 ± 4.3, and 2.7± 2.7 ng/ml, respectively. An average of 31.6 ± 26.7 grams of prostate tissue was resected during GLEP. Postoperative parameters of PVR, Q max and PSA were 35.5 ± 31.3 ml, 17.2 ± 8.8 ml/s and 0.8 ± 0.65 ng/dl, respectively. There were no cases of postoperative infections or IPP malfunctions reported during a mean follow-up of 34.14±36 months.

Conclusions
Our experience shows that TUS performed after IPP placement is effective and safe in addressing underlying conditions such as BPH, bladder tumors and urethral strictures. Our findings indicate favorable postoperative outcomes in terms of PVR and PSA levels, without any reported infections or malfunctions of the IPP. However, it is important to consider the limitations of this study, including the small sample size. Further research with larger sample sizes would be beneficial to validate these findings and provide more comprehensive insights into the outcomes of TUS following IPP placement.

Disclosure
Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Coloplast, Irrisept.