FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2058501367> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2058501367 endingPage "156" @default.
• W2058501367 startingPage "153" @default.
• W2058501367 abstract "No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology: Infection/Inflammation1 Jul 2004PENILE PROSTHESIS CULTURES DURING REVISION SURGERY: A MULTICENTER STUDY GERARD D. HENRY, STEVEN K. WILSON, JOHN R. DELK, CULLEY C. CARSON, ARI SILVERSTEIN, MARIO A. CLEVES, and CRAIG F. DONATUCCI GERARD D. HENRYGERARD D. HENRY Financial interest and/or other relationship with Mentor, AMS and Pfizer. More articles by this author , STEVEN K. WILSONSTEVEN K. WILSON Financial interest and/or other relationship with AMS and AMT. More articles by this author , JOHN R. DELKJOHN R. DELK Financial interest and/or other relationship with American Medical Systems Inc., Mentor Corp., Sepracor, Indevus, Pharmacia and AMT. More articles by this author , CULLEY C. CARSONCULLEY C. CARSON More articles by this author , ARI SILVERSTEINARI SILVERSTEIN More articles by this author , MARIO A. CLEVESMARIO A. CLEVES More articles by this author , and CRAIG F. DONATUCCICRAIG F. DONATUCCI More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000132141.48587.f1AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: Initial implantation of inflatable penile prosthesis has a 3% risk of infection. Reoperation of penile implants has a higher rate of infection, estimated between 10% and 18%. To explain the higher risk in revision surgery in this prospective study we cultured clinically uninfected prostheses requiring revision. Prosthesis pain was also investigated as a predictor of positive culture. Materials and Methods: At 3 institutions cultures were prospectively obtained from 77 clinically uninfected penile prostheses at revision surgery. Immediately upon surgical exposure of the pump cultures were obtained. If a bacterial biofilm was noted on any component it was additionally cultured. All culture isolates positive for a staphylococcus species were tested for sensitivity to rifampin and tetracycline (minocycline). An implant is now available that is coated with these antibiotics. Patient history of chronic prosthesis pain was ascertained. Results: Culture positive bacteria were found in 54 of 77 (70%) patients with clinically uninfected penile prostheses. In some patients more than 1 organism grew and, occasionally, the pump culture was negative but the biofilm was positive. Of 54 patients 49 had positive (90%) culture for staphylococcus genus with 10 different species. All staphylococcal species were sensitive to rifampin and/or tetracycline. We did not find a significant association between prosthesis related pain and culture laboratory results. Conclusions: The majority of clinically uninfected penile prostheses have organisms growing in the implant spaces at reoperation. Most of these organisms are staphylococcal species that are sensitive to rifampin/minocycline. References 1 : Inflatable penile implant infection: predisposing factors and treatment suggestions. J Urol1995; 153: 659. Link, Google Scholar 2 : Factors influencing the outcomes of penile prosthesis surgery at a teaching institution. Urology2003; 62: 918. Google Scholar 3 : Risk factors for penile prosthetic infection. J Urol1996; 156: 402. Link, Google Scholar 4 : Diagnosis and therapy of subclinically infected prostheses. Surg Gynecol Obstet1993; 177: 504. Google Scholar 5 : Cultures from genitourinary prostheses at reoperation: questioning the role of staphylococcus epidermidis in periprosthetic infection. J Urol1995; 154: 387. Link, Google Scholar 6 : Modern Epidemiology. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.1986. Google Scholar 7 : Statistical Methods for Survival Data Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.1992. Google Scholar 8 : Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data (Statistics for Biology and Health). New York: Springer Verlag1997. Google Scholar 9 : An Introduction to Survival Analysis Using STATA. Texas: Stata Press2002. Google Scholar 10 : Infections of genitourinary prostheses. Infect Dis Clin N Am1989; 3: 259. Google Scholar 11 : The nose: an underestimated source of Staphylococcus aureus causing wound infection. J Hosp Infect1998; 40: S3. Google Scholar 12 : Late hematogenous infection of penile prosthesis. J Urol1988; 139: 50. Link, Google Scholar 13 : Antibiotic resistance of bacteria in biofilms. Lancet2001; 358: 135. Google Scholar 14 : The prosthesis salvage operation: immediate replacement of the infected penile prosthesis. J Urol1996; 155: 155. Link, Google Scholar 15 : Periprosthetic infections. J Urol1987; 138: 68. Link, Google Scholar 16 : Infectious complications of penile prosthetic implants. J Urol1987; 138: 65. Link, Google Scholar 17 : Efficacy of antibiotic impregnation of inflatable penile prosthesis in decreasing infection in original implants. J Urol2004; 171: 1611. Link, Google Scholar 18 : Short term follow-up for enhanced American Medical Systems 700 CX prosthesis. J Urol2002; 167: 150. abstract 600. Google Scholar 19 : The broad-spectrum activity and efficacy of catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin. J Infect Dis1996; 173: 418. Google Scholar 20 : Antibacterial activity of antibiotic coated silicone grafts. J Urol1998; 160: 1910. Link, Google Scholar From the Institute for Urologic Excellence, Van Buren (GDH, SKW, JRD), Department of Biostatistics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock (MAC), Arkansas, Department of Urology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (CCC), and the Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham (AS, CFD), North Carolina© 2004 by American Urological Association, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByZiegelmann M, Linder B, Avant R and Elliott D (2019) Bacterial Cultures at the Time of Artificial Urinary Sphincter Revision Surgery in Clinically Uninfected Devices: A Contemporary SeriesJournal of Urology, VOL. 201, NO. 6, (1152-1157), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2019.Henry G, Karpman E, Brant W, Christine B, Kansas B, Khera M, Jones L, Kohler T, Bennett N, Rhee E, Eisenhart E and Bella A (2018) The Who, How and What of Real-World Penile Implantation in 2015: The PROPPER Registry Baseline DataJournal of Urology, VOL. 195, NO. 2, (427-433), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2016.Muench P (2018) Infections Versus Penile Implants: The War on BugsJournal of Urology, VOL. 189, NO. 5, (1631-1637), Online publication date: 1-May-2013.Nehra A, Carson C, Chapin A and Ginkel A (2018) Long-Term Infection Outcomes of 3-Piece Antibiotic Impregnated Penile Prostheses Used in Replacement Implant SurgeryJournal of Urology, VOL. 188, NO. 3, (899-903), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2012.Carson C, Mulcahy J and Harsch M (2018) Long-Term Infection Outcomes After Original Antibiotic Impregnated Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Implants: Up to 7.7 Years of FollowupJournal of Urology, VOL. 185, NO. 2, (614-618), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2011.Köhler T and Hellstrom W (2018) Using Wound Drains for the Uncomplicated Penile ProsthesisJournal of Urology, VOL. 186, NO. 4, (1187-1189), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2011.Henry G, Kansal N, Callaway M, Grigsby T, Henderson J, Noble J, Palmer T, Cleves M, Ludlow J, Simmons C and Mook T (2018) Centers of Excellence Concept and Penile Prostheses: An Outcome AnalysisJournal of Urology, VOL. 181, NO. 3, (1264-1268), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2009.Henry G, Carson C, Wilson S, Wiygul J, Tornehl C, Cleves M, Simmons C and Donatucci C (2018) Revision Washout Decreases Implant Capsule Tissue Culture Positivity: A Multicenter StudyJournal of Urology, VOL. 179, NO. 1, (186-190), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2008.Magera J, Inman B and Elliott D (2018) Does Preoperative Topical Antimicrobial Scrub Reduce Positive Surgical Site Culture Rates in Men Undergoing Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement?Journal of Urology, VOL. 178, NO. 4, (1328-1332), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2007.Silverstein A, Henry G, Evans B, Pasmore M, Simmons C and Donatucci C (2018) Biofilm Formation on Clinically Noninfected Penile ProsthesesJournal of Urology, VOL. 176, NO. 3, (1008-1011), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2006. Volume 172Issue 1July 2004Page: 153-156 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2004 by American Urological Association, Inc.Keywordsprostheses and implantsinfectionbacteriaimpotenceMetricsAuthor Information GERARD D. HENRY Financial interest and/or other relationship with Mentor, AMS and Pfizer. More articles by this author STEVEN K. WILSON Financial interest and/or other relationship with AMS and AMT. More articles by this author JOHN R. DELK Financial interest and/or other relationship with American Medical Systems Inc., Mentor Corp., Sepracor, Indevus, Pharmacia and AMT. More articles by this author CULLEY C. CARSON More articles by this author ARI SILVERSTEIN More articles by this author MARIO A. CLEVES More articles by this author CRAIG F. DONATUCCI More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ..." @default.
• W2058501367 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2058501367 creator A5018075996 @default.
• W2058501367 creator A5026508278 @default.
• W2058501367 creator A5026692318 @default.
• W2058501367 creator A5052412738 @default.
• W2058501367 creator A5059817599 @default.
• W2058501367 creator A5062773456 @default.
• W2058501367 creator A5085115101 @default.
• W2058501367 date "2004-07-01" @default.
• W2058501367 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2058501367 title "PENILE PROSTHESIS CULTURES DURING REVISION SURGERY: A MULTICENTER STUDY" @default.
• W2058501367 cites W1969593481 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W1997071534 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2018930528 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2034340472 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2047335476 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2084173045 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2089241105 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2092687067 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2125603952 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2142314945 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2397972927 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2418092988 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W2418348497 @default.
• W2058501367 cites W4252119657 @default.
• W2058501367 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000132141.48587.f1" @default.
• W2058501367 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15201759" @default.
• W2058501367 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W2058501367 type Work @default.
• W2058501367 sameAs 2058501367 @default.
• W2058501367 citedByCount "104" @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672012 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672013 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672014 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672015 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672016 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672017 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672018 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672019 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672020 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672021 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672022 @default.
• W2058501367 countsByYear W20585013672023 @default.
• W2058501367 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2058501367 hasAuthorship W2058501367A5018075996 @default.
• W2058501367 hasAuthorship W2058501367A5026508278 @default.
• W2058501367 hasAuthorship W2058501367A5026692318 @default.
• W2058501367 hasAuthorship W2058501367A5052412738 @default.
• W2058501367 hasAuthorship W2058501367A5059817599 @default.
• W2058501367 hasAuthorship W2058501367A5062773456 @default.
• W2058501367 hasAuthorship W2058501367A5085115101 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConcept C2776165071 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConcept C2778715743 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConcept C2992435398 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConceptScore W2058501367C141071460 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConceptScore W2058501367C168563851 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConceptScore W2058501367C2776165071 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConceptScore W2058501367C2778715743 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConceptScore W2058501367C2992435398 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConceptScore W2058501367C61434518 @default.
• W2058501367 hasConceptScore W2058501367C71924100 @default.
• W2058501367 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2058501367 hasLocation W20585013671 @default.
• W2058501367 hasLocation W20585013672 @default.
• W2058501367 hasOpenAccess W2058501367 @default.
• W2058501367 hasPrimaryLocation W20585013671 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W104859734 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W1977594645 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W1978976163 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W2003938723 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W2047967234 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W2118496982 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W2126856172 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W2412613854 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W2439875401 @default.
• W2058501367 hasRelatedWork W2961555043 @default.
• W2058501367 hasVolume "172" @default.
• W2058501367 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2058501367 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2058501367 magId "2058501367" @default.
• W2058501367 workType "article" @default.