Comment on prospective analysis of cultures from the furlow insertion tool: a possible etiology for penile prosthesis infections

Comment on prospective analysis of cultures from the furlow insertion tool: a possible etiology for penile prosthesis infections


Play all audios:

Loading...

Access through your institution Buy or subscribe This paper is an excellent addition to the literature surrounding penile prosthesis infection prevention [1]. The authors have identified an


aspect of penile prosthesis surgery, similar to the use of chlorhexidine–alcohol skin prep or no-touch technique, that surgeons can seize upon to reduce the possibility of infection [2, 3].


This study clarifies the potential infection risk lurking within the indispensable Furlow passer. The authors investigated this phenomenon using appropriate observational methods and


discovered visible residue and concerning rates of unseen bacteria. They offer a preemptive solution that surgeons can implement even before making incision. Like parachutists, penile


implanters should check our equipment before we use it! These results should encourage implant surgeons and industry to innovate answers to the Furlow problem. Reducing infection risk starts


with research and continues with development of equipment that mitigates risk as much as possible across all levels of surgical expertise. Experienced prosthetic urologists may be savvy


enough to ensure that their tools are sterilized properly. Lower volume implant surgeons may not be so thorough. Options include a disposable Furlow tool, as the authors suggest, or perhaps


an entirely new method of cylinder deployment. The best outcomes for our patients depend on continuing to decrease penile prosthesis infection risk by every possible method. This is a


preview of subscription content, access via your institution ACCESS OPTIONS Access through your institution Subscribe to this journal Receive 12 print issues and online access $259.00 per


year only $21.58 per issue Learn more Buy this article * Purchase on SpringerLink * Instant access to full article PDF Buy now Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated


during checkout ADDITIONAL ACCESS OPTIONS: * Log in * Learn about institutional subscriptions * Read our FAQs * Contact customer support REFERENCES * Yafi FA, Furr J, El-Khatib FM, van


Renterghem K, Venturino L, Andrianne R. et al. Prospective analysis of cultures from the furlow insertion tool: a possible etiology for penile prosthesis infections. Int J Impot Res. * Yeung


LL, Grewal S, Bullock A, Lai HH, Brandes SB. A comparison of chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine for eliminating skin flora before genitourinary prosthetic surgery: a randomized


controlled trial. J Urol. 2013;189:136–40. 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  Download references AUTHOR INFORMATION AUTHORS AND AFFILIATIONS * Section of Urology,


Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, Lebanon, PA, USA Martin S. Gross Authors * Martin S. Gross View author publications You can also search for this


author inPubMed Google Scholar CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Correspondence to Martin S. Gross. ETHICS DECLARATIONS CONFLICT OF INTEREST The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.


ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PUBLISHER’S NOTE Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS Reprints


and permissions ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE Gross, M.S. Comment on Prospective analysis of cultures from the furlow insertion tool: a possible etiology for penile prosthesis


infections. _Int J Impot Res_ 33, 382 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-0281-1 Download citation * Received: 26 March 2020 * Revised: 01 April 2020 * Accepted: 06 April 2020 *


Published: 14 April 2020 * Issue Date: April 2021 * DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-0281-1 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this


content: Get shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Copy to clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative