ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2025
Practice patterns of Canadian penile prosthesis implanters A survey-based analysis.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPenile prosthesis implantation is a well-established treatment for refractory erectile dysfunction; however, significant variations exist in surgical techniques and practice patterns, often influenced by individual surgeon experience and training. Our study aimed to identify these variations among Canadian implanters, assessing their approach to penile prosthesis surgery.
methodsA cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted to evaluate the practice patterns of Canadian surgeons performing penile prosthesis implantation. The study included implanters from all provinces who perform more than five cases annually. An anonymous electronic survey was distributed, assessing practice patterns, surgical approach, and recommendations for improving penile prosthesis surgery in Canada.
resultsSeventeen Canadian urologists performing over five annual cases participated in the study, with the annual volume varying among respondents. The majority (88.2%, n=15) routinely checked HbA1c levels, with 54.5% (n=6) using a cutoff of 8%. Additionally, 58.8% (n=10) routinely ordered a urine culture, and 94.1% (n=16) performed a preoperative scrub. Just over half (52.9%, n=9) prescribed preoperative antibiotics, the majority (88.2%, n=15) used an antibiotic dip, and postoperatively, 94.1% (n=16) of respondents prescribed antibiotics. Most implanters (76.5%, n=13) primarily used a penoscrotal approach, and 47.1% (n=8) did not routinely place a drain. Respondents also indicated perceived ways to improve penile prosthesis education across Canada, focusing on patient education and surgical simulation.
conclusionsWhile key aspects, such as the ideal surgical approach, HbA1c cutoffs, antibiotic regimens, and intraoperative techniques, remain debated, our findings underscore the need for further standardization. High-quality educational resources and consensus guidelines could help implanters refine their practice and improve patient outcomes.
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.