Darouiche RO. Treatment of infections associated with surgical implants. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:1422–9.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Baas W, O’Connor B, Welliver C, Stahl PJ, Stember DS, Wilson SK, et al. Worldwide trends in penile implantation surgery: data from over 63,000 implants. Transl Androl Urol. 2020;9:31–7.

Article  Google Scholar 

Lee R, Te AE, Kaplan SA, Sandhu JS. Temporal trends in adoption of and indications for the artificial urinary sphincter. J Urol. 2009;181:2622–7.

Article  Google Scholar 

Matsushita K, Chughtai BI, Maschino AC, Lee RK, Sandhu JS. International variation in artificial urinary sphincter use. Urology. 2012;80:667–72.

Article  Google Scholar 

Trost LW, McCaslin R, Linder B, Hellstrom WJ. Long-term outcomes of penile prostheses for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Expert Rev Med Dev. 2013;10:353–66.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Lledo-Garcia E, Jara-Rascon J, Moncada Iribarren I, Pinero-Sanchez J, Aragon-Chamizo J, Hernandez-Fernandez C. Penile Prosthesis First and Replacement Surgeries: Analysis of Patient and Partner Satisfaction. J Sex Med. 2015;12:1646–53.

Article  Google Scholar 

Kucuk EV, Tahra A, Bindayi A, Onol FF. Erectile dysfunction patients are more satisfied with penile prosthesis implantation compared with tadalafil and intracavernosal injection treatments. Andrology. 2016;4:952–6.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Zargaroff S, Sharma V, Berhanu D, Pearl JA, Meeks JJ, Dupree JM, et al. National trends in the treatment of penile prosthesis infections by explantation alone vs. immediate salvage and reimplantation. J Sex Med. 2014;11:1078–85.

Article  Google Scholar 

Ghanem H, Ghazy S, El-Meliegy A. Corporeal counter incisions: a simplified approach to penile prosthesis implantation in fibrotic cases. Int J Impot Res. 2000;12:153–6.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Wilson SK, Simhan J, Gross MS. Cylinder insertion into scarred corporal bodies: prosthetic urology’s most difficult challenge: some suggestions for making the surgery easier. Int J Impot Res. 2020;32:483–94.

Article  Google Scholar 

Darouiche RO, Wall MJ Jr, Itani KM, Otterson MF, Webb AL, Carrick MM, et al. Chlorhexidine-Alcohol versus Povidone-Iodine for Surgical-Site Antisepsis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:18–26.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Lee I, Agarwal RK, Lee BY, Fishman NO, Umscheid CA. Systematic review and cost analysis comparing use of chlorhexidine with use of iodine for preoperative skin antisepsis to prevent surgical site infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31:1219–29.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Eid JF, Wilson SK, Cleves M, Salem EA. Coated implants and “no touch” surgical technique decreases risk of infection in inflatable penile prosthesis implantation to 0.46%. Urology. 2012;79:1310–5.

Article  Google Scholar 

Eid JF. Penile Implant: Review of a “No-Touch” Technique. Sex Med Rev. 2016;4:294–300.

Article  Google Scholar 

Dhabuwala C. In vitro assessment of antimicrobial properties of rifampin-coated Titan(®) Coloplast penile implants and comparison with Inhibizone(®). J Sex Med. 2010;7:3516–9.

Article  Google Scholar 

Dhabuwala C, Sheth S, Zamzow B. Infection rates of rifampin/gentamicin-coated Titan Coloplast penile implants. Comparison with Inhibizone-impregnated AMS penile implants. J Sex Med. 2011;8:315–20.

Article  Google Scholar 

Manka MG, Yang D, Andrews J, Chalmers B, Hebert K, Köhler TS, et al. Intraoperative Use of Betadine Irrigation is Associated With a 9-Fold Increased Likelihood of Penile Prosthesis Infection: Results From a Retrospective Case-Control Study. Sex Med. 2020;8:422–7.

Article  Google Scholar 

Henry GD, Wilson SK, Delk JR 2nd, Carson CC, Wiygul J, Tornehl C, et al. Revision washout decreases penile prosthesis infection in revision surgery: a multicenter study. J Urol. 2005;173:89–92.

Article  Google Scholar 

Carson CC, Mulcahy JJ, Harsch MR. Long-term infection outcomes after original antibiotic impregnated inflatable penile prosthesis implants: up to 7.7 years of followup. J Urol. 2011;185:614–8.

Article  Google Scholar 

Jani K, Smith C, Delk JR, Carson CC, Donatucci CF, Cleves MA, et al. Infection Retardant Coatings Impact on Bacterial Presence in Penile Prosthesis Surgery: a multicenter study. Urology. 2018;119:104–8.

Article  Google Scholar 

Wilson SK, Zumbe J, Henry GD, Salem EA, Delk JR, Cleves MA. Infection reduction using antibiotic-coated inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology. 2007;70:337–40.

Article  Google Scholar 

Mulcahy JJ, Carson CC 3rd. Long-term infection rates in diabetic patients implanted with antibiotic-impregnated versus nonimpregnated inflatable penile prostheses: 7-year outcomes. Eur Urol. 2011;60:167–72.

Article  Google Scholar 

Gon LM, de Campos CCC, Voris BRI, Passeri LA, Fregonesi A, Riccetto CLZ. A systematic review of penile prosthesis infection and meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus role. BMC Urol. 2021;21:35.

Article  Google Scholar 

Montgomery BD, Lomas DJ, Ziegelmann MJ, Trost LW. Infection risk of undergoing multiple penile prostheses: an analysis of referred patient surgical histories. Int J Impot Res. 2018;30:147–52.

Article  Google Scholar 

Litwiller SE, Kim KB, Fone PD, White RW, Stone AR. Post-prostatectomy incontinence and the artificial urinary sphincter: a long-term study of patient satisfaction and criteria for success. J Urol. 1996;156:1975–80.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Van der Aa F, Drake MJ, Kasyan GR, Petrolekas A, Cornu JN. The artificial urinary sphincter after a quarter of a century: a critical systematic review of its use in male non-neurogenic incontinence. Eur Urol. 2013;63:681–9.

Article  Google Scholar 

Lai HH, Hsu EI, Teh BS, Butler EB, Boone TB. 13 years of experience with artificial urinary sphincter implantation at Baylor College of Medicine. J Urol. 2007;177:1021–5.

Article  Google Scholar 

Ramsay AK, Granitsiotis P, Conn IG. The use of the artificial urinary sphincter in the West of Scotland: a single centre 10-year experience. Scott Med J. 2007;52:14–7.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Singh G, Thomas DG. Artificial urinary sphincter for post-prostatectomy incontinence. Br J Urol. 1996;77:248–51.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Trigo Rocha F, Gomes CM, Mitre AI, Arap S, Srougi M. A prospective study evaluating the efficacy of the artificial sphincter AMS 800 for the treatment of postradical prostatectomy urinary incontinence and the correlation between preoperative urodynamic and surgical outcomes. Urology. 2008;71:85–9.

Article  Google Scholar 

Walsh IK, Williams SG, Mahendra V, Nambirajan T, Stone AR. Artificial urinary sphincter implantation in the irradiated patient: safety, efficacy and satisfaction. BJU Int. 2002;89:364–8.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Gousse AE, Madjar S, Lambert MM, Fishman IJ. Artificial urinary sphincter for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: long-term subjective results. J Urol. 2001;166:1755–8.

CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Carvajal A, Benavides J, García-Perdomo HA, Henry GD. Risk factors associated with penile prosthesis infection: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Impot Res. 2020;32:587–97.

Article  Google Scholar 

Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG, McConnell JD, Hendin BN. Factors influencing the outcomes of penile prosthesis surgery at a teaching institution. Urology. 2003;62:918–21.

Article  Google Scholar 

Henry GD, Wilson SK, Delk JR 2nd, Carson CC, Silverstein A, Cleves MA, et al. Penile prosthesis cultures during revision surgery: a multicenter study. J Urol. 2004;172:153–6.

Article  Google Scholar 

Henry GD, Carson CC, Wilson SK, Wiygul J, Tornehl C, Cleves MA, et al. Revision washout decreases implant capsule tissue culture positivity: a multicenter study. J Urol. 2008;179:186–90.

Article  Google Scholar 

Palmisano F, Boeri L, Ievoli R, Sánchez-Curbelo J, Spinelli MG, Gregori A et al. Ten-year experience with penile prosthetic surgery for the treatment of erectile dysfunction: outcomes of a tertiary referral center and predictors of early prosthetic infection. Asian J Androl. 2022;24:32–9.

Austin PC. A tutorial on multilevel survival analysis: methods, models and applications. Int Stat Rev. 2017;85:185–203.

Article  Google Scholar 

Austin PC. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios. Stat Med. 2013;32:2837–49.

Article  Google Scholar 

Nosé BD, Grimberg DCD, Lentz AC. Update on Intraoperative Cultures, Biofilms, and Modifiable Factors During Revision of Clinically Non-Infected Penile Implants. Sex Med Rev. 2021;9:160–8.

Article  Google Scholar 

Henry GD, Donatucci CF, Conners W, Greenfield JM, Carson CC, Wilson SK, et al. An outcomes analysis of over 200 revision surgeries for penile prosthesis implantation: a multicenter study. J Sex Med. 2012;9:309–15.

Article  Google Scholar