Purpose: The AUA (American Urological Association) Position Statement on opioid use recommends using opioids only when necessary. We sought to determine if routine prescribing of opioids is necessary for pain control after vasectomy, and if an association exists with persistent use. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of patients who underwent vasectomy in clinic between April 2017 and March 2018. Patients were stratified into 2 groups, including those initially prescribed opioids and those not receiving opioid prescriptions at the time of vasectomy. The initial pain medication regimen depended on the standard prescription practice of each provider. Encounters with a medical provider for scrotal pain within 30 days, subsequent opioid prescriptions and new persistent opioid prescriptions between 90 and 180 days were compared between the 2 groups using the Fisher exact test. Results: Between April 2017 and March 2018 a total of 228 patients underwent clinic vasectomy as performed by 8 urologists. At the time of vasectomy 102 patients received opioid prescriptions and 126 received no opioid prescriptions. There was no statistically significant difference between the opioid and nonopioid groups in encounters for scrotal pain (12.7% vs 18.4%, p [ 0.279). The incidence of new persistent opioid use was 7.8% in the opioid cohort compared to 1.5% in the nonopioid cohort (p [ 0.046). Conclusions: Opioids, which do not appear to be necessary in men who undergo vasectomy, were associated with persistent use in 7.8% of patients at 3 to 6 months. In the face of an opioid epidemic urologists should take action to limit over prescription of opioids after vasectomy.
Introduction
The efficacy, safety, and postoperative outcomes of synchronous surgery for concomitant erectile dysfunction (ED) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) remain unclear.
Objectives
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the available synchronous surgical approaches for concomitant ED and SUI and to assess the reoperation rates compared to asynchronous surgery and surgery only for ED or SUI.
Methods
We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases until June 2022 for relevant studies. Based on data availability, we performed a meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) comparing reoperation rates after synchronous surgery in patients with concomitant ED and SUI versus asynchronous surgery, as well as surgery solely for ED or SUI (PROSPERO: CRD42022326941).
Results
We included 18 studies in the systematic review (16,517 patients) and 5 in the meta-analysis. Comparing synchronous implantation of penile prosthesis and artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) versus asynchronous surgery, no statistically significant differences were observed in the reoperation rates [OR:0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52–1.84, I2:0%). Comparing synchronous implantation of both penile prosthesis and AUS versus implantation of only a penile prosthesis or an AUS, combined surgery was associated with higher reoperation rates (OR:2.02, 95%CI: 1.29–3.16, I2:36% and OR:1.7, 95%CI: 1.25–2.32, I2:0%, respectively). Synchronous surgery led to high satisfaction rates and significant improvement in ED and SUI. Evidence for the combination of penile prosthesis with a male sling or the ProACT device is low, but data suggests it may be safe and effective. The synchronous placement of a Mini-Jupette sling and penile prosthesis represents a promising treatment modality for the correction of ED and mild SUI and/or climacturia.
Conclusions
Synchronous penile prosthesis and AUS implantation appears safe and effective in patients with severe ED and SUI. Further high-quality studies are mandatory to strengthen the current scarce evidence for synchronous surgery in patients with ED and SUI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.