Subcutaneous extrusion of penile prosthesis cylinders beneath the glans penis is an unusual but difficult complication of penile prosthesis. Without surgical repair, extrusion, infection, and corporeal fibrosis may ensue. Twenty-eight patients with distal corporeal extrusion were reviewed to identify the optimum treatment outcome for these penile prosthesis complications. Records of 28 men with subcutaneous distal penile prosthesis cylinder extrusion were reviewed. Mean age was 56.2 y. Etiology of erectile dysfunction was diabetes mellitus in 11, vasculogenic in 10, Peyronie's disease in five, radical pelvic surgery in five. Duration of penile prosthesis was 8 -72 months (mean 42.6). No patient had penile prosthesis infection or device exposure through the skin. Distal corporoplasty was treated on 18=28 men using cylinder repositioning and direct tunica albuginea repair. Ten men underwent repair using a Gortex windsock. 8=18 corporoplasty and 6=10 windsock patients required glans fixation for treatment of hypermobile glans following cylinder relocation. In two patients with windsock repair, extrusion recurrence occurred 6 and 18 months following surgery and 1=6 had post operative infection requiring prosthesis removal. Mean surgical time for corporoplasty was 52.8 minutes while windsock reconstruction was 89.6 minutes. Distal subcutaneous penile prosthesis cylinder extrusion produces coital pain and predisposes to cylinder exposure and infection. Early repair with or without additional prosthetic materials will return penile prostheses to a normal functioning state. Distal corporoplasty with cylinder repositioning appears to be a simple, low morbidity solution to this difficult dilemma. Outcomes with distal corporoplasty result in better function, less pain, and fewer recurrences than Gortex windsock repair.

PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of the ureteroscopic management of ureteral stones immediately after a first colic attack.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of 226 patients with obstructive ureteral stones who underwent ureteroscopy with stone retrieval. The 67 patients in group A underwent ureteroscopy within 48 hours of admission to our emergency department, whereas the 159 patients in group B underwent ureteroscopy more than 48 hours after admission. The chi-square test was used to evaluate and compare stone-free status, auxiliary procedures, and complications and the Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher's exact tests were used to analyze qualitative data.ResultsMean stone sizes in groups A and B were 2.41±1.62 mm and 4.11±2.64 mm, respectively. No patient experienced a major complication during or after the procedure. Stone-free rates were 89.55% and 89.93%, respectively.ConclusionsEmergency ureteroscopy in cases of obstructive ureteral stones is both safe and effective and offers the advantages of immediate stone fragmentation and the relief of acute-onset colic pain.

No abstract

PurposePercutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the procedure of choice for treating large renal stones. Pneumatic lithotripsy (Lithoclast®) is effective regardless of the stones' composition, and ultrasonic lithotripsy allows the aspiration of small debris during lithotripsy. We investigated the efficacy and safety of PCNL via Lithoclast® alone or combined with ultrasonic lithotripsy.Materials and MethodsThirty-five (group A) and 39 (group B) patients underwent Lithoclast® PCNL and combination therapy, respectively, from May 2001 to March 2010, and the two groups were compared in terms of stone size, location, and composition; operative time; average number of treatments; hospital days; hemoglobin loss; ancillary procedures; rate of device failure; and initial and total stone-free rates.ResultsThe two groups did not differ significantly in preoperative stone size, location, or composition; the average number of treatments; or the initial and overall stone-free rates. However, combination therapy was associated with a significantly lower operative time (181±50 vs. 221±65 min, respectively, p=0.004), number of hospital days (11.6±3.8 vs. 14.2±4.4 days, respectively, p=0.009), and average hemoglobin loss (1.12±0.61 vs. 1.39±1.02 g/dl, respectively, p=0.013). Transfusions were required in 6 patients (4 and 2 in each group, respectively), but there were no significant complications related to percutaneous access. There were 2 (5.7%) mechanical failures (Lithoclast® probe fracture) in the group A and 5 (12.8%) in the group B (2 cases of suction tube obstruction, 3 cases of overheating).ConclusionsThe combination of ultrasonic lithotripter and Lithoclast® is more effective than Lithoclast® alone because it significantly decreases operative time, hemoglobin loss, and the hospital stay. This may reflect the superior power of Lithoclast® and the ability to aspirate the debris during ultrasonic lithotripsy.