| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3862273 | The Journal of Urology | 2012 | 5 Pages |
PurposePatients who undergo device revision surgery are at higher risk for infection than virgin implant recipients. The revision rate due to virgin implant infection is statistically significantly lower for minocycline/rifampin impregnated than for nonimpregnated inflatable penile prostheses. We determined whether the frequency of infection revision events after device replacement surgery would also be lower for minocycline/rifampin impregnated inflatable penile prostheses.Materials and MethodsPatient information forms voluntarily submitted to AMS® after replacement inflatable penile prosthesis implantation between 2001 and 2007 were retrospectively reviewed to compare secondary infection related revision events for antibiotic impregnated vs nonimpregnated implants. Only men who received an inflatable penile prosthesis at a first recorded operation to replace a previously implanted penile prosthesis were included in the study. Life table survival analysis was done between the groups to compare infection related events resulting in a second surgical revision after replacement implantation. Survival function extrapolation was based on parametric analysis using the Weibull distribution model.ResultsOn life table survival analysis secondary revision due to infection was significantly less common in the minocycline/rifampin impregnated group than in the nonimpregnated group (log rank p = 0.0252). At up to 6.6 years of followup 2.5% of 9,300 men with vs 3.7% of 1,764 without an impregnated device underwent secondary revision due to infection.ConclusionsThis long-term device survival analysis provides clinical evidence of a significant decrease in infection related secondary revisions using minocycline/rifampin impregnated prostheses vs nonimpregnated inflatable penile prostheses at replacement implant surgery.
