Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30182080›Full record

ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2018

Infection following penile prosthesis placement at an academic training center remains low despite involvement of surgeons-in-training.

Kara E McAbee, Amy M Pearlman, Ryan P Terlecki

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Penile Prosthesis Infection: Myths and Realities.The world journal of men's health · 2019
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kara E McAbeeDepartment of Urology, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Amy M PearlmanDepartment of Urology, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9216-5387
Ryan P TerleckiDepartment of Urology, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Primary care providers harbor misconceptions regarding penile prosthetic surgery, largely overestimating the rate of infection. Rates of infection following surgery for primary placement and revision are estimated as 1% to 3% and 10% to 18%, respectively. Our objective was to determine the contemporary incidence of infection following inflatable penile prostheses surgery at an academic training center where surgeons-in-training are routinely involved. Materials and Methods: Review of a prospectively collected single-surgeon database was performed. All cases of inflatable penile prostheses placement from January 2011 through June 2017 were reviewed. Information regarding training level of assistant surgeon(s) was collected, and follow-up data was compiled regarding postoperative infections and need for revision surgery. Results: Three hundred nine cases meeting inclusion criteria were identified. Mean patient age was 64.2 years, and mean follow-up was 28.7 months. Distribution involved 257 (83.2%) for primary placement, 45 (14.6%) for removal/replacement, and 7 (2.3%) in setting of prior device removal. Diabetes was noted in 31.1% of men. Surgeon-in-training involvement was noted in 100% of cases. Infection was confirmed in a patient who had skin breakdown over an area of corporal reconstruction with polytetrafluoroethylene. The overall postoperative infection rate was 0.3%. Conclusions: In this series from an academic training center, infection following penile prosthetic surgery is low, similar to other centers of excellence, even with 100% involvement of surgeons-in-training. This data should be used to better inform primary care providers and members of the general public potentially interested in restoration of sexual function.

Indexed as

Academic Medical CentersAgedClinical CompetenceEducational StatusFellowships and ScholarshipsFollow-Up StudiesHumansInternship and ResidencyMaleMiddle AgedPenile ImplantationPenile ProsthesisPostoperative ComplicationsReoperationRetrospective StudiesUrogenital Surgical ProceduresInfectionPenile prosthesisRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID30182080
PMCPMC6121020
OpenAlexW2890661287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.