ArticleUrology2018
Evaluating the Role of Postoperative Oral Antibiotic Administration in Artificial Urinary Sphincter and Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Explantation: A Nationwide Analysis.
Article in Urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early Outcomes After Discontinuing Routine Gentamicin Irrigation During AMS 800 Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation: A Single-Centre Retrospective Before-After Cohort Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Infection prevention strategies in penile prosthesis implantation: a narrative review.International journal of impotence research · 2026Review
- Practice patterns of Canadian penile prosthesis implanters A survey-based analysis.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025Article
- Risky business: penile prosthesis in high-risk patients.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- A case of artificial urinary sphincter implantation in a patient who underwent both urethroplasty and ileal neobladder construction.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Artificial urinary sphincter erosion and infection: a contemporary review of perioperative considerations and management.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Review
- Changes and debates in male stress urinary incontinence surgery practice patterns: a contemporary review.Translational andrology and urology · 2023Review
- Characterizing the biofilm of artificial urinary sphincters (AUS).Translational andrology and urology · 2023Article
- Penile implant infection factors: a contemporary narrative review of literature.Translational andrology and urology · 2021Review
- Artificial Urinary Sphincter Complications: Risk Factors, Workup, and Clinical Approach.Current urology reports · 2021Review
- Penile implant surgery-managing complications.Faculty reviews · 2021Review
- Tips and tricks in the management of inflatable penile prosthesis infection: A review.Arab journal of urology · 2021Review
- Penile implant infection prevention part II: device coatings have changed the game.International journal of impotence research · 2020Review
- Techniques and considerations of prosthetic surgery after phalloplasty in the transgender male.Translational andrology and urology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether postoperative oral antibiotics are associated with decreased risk of explantation following artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) or inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement. Although frequently prescribed, the role of postoperative oral antibiotics in preventing AUS or IPP explantation is unknown. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe queried the MarketScan database to identify male patients undergoing AUS or IPP placement between 2003 and 2014. The primary end point was device explantation within 3 months of placement. Multivariate regression analysis controlling for clinical risk factors assessed the impact of postoperative oral antibiotic administration on explant rates.
resultsWe identified 10,847 and 3594 men who underwent IPP and AUS placement, respectively, between 2003 and 2014. Postoperative oral antibiotics were prescribed to 60.6% of patients following IPP placement and 61.1% of patients following AUS placement. The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were fluoroquinolones (35.6%), cephalexin (17.7%), trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (7.0%), and amoxicillin-clavulanate (3.2%). Explant rates did not differ based upon receipt of oral antibiotics (antibiotics vs no antibiotics: IPP: 2.2% vs 1.9%, P = .18, AUS: 3.9% vs 4.0%, P = .94). On multivariate analysis, no individual class of antibiotic was associated with decreased odds of device explantation.
conclusionPostoperative oral antibiotics are prescribed to nearly two-thirds of patients but are not associated with reduced odds of explant following IPP or AUS placement. Given the risks to individuals associated with use of antibiotics and increasing bacterial resistance, the role of oral antibiotics after prosthetic placement should be reconsidered and further studied in a prospective fashion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.