Does the presence of human papillomavirus (HPV) in semen impact seminal parameters and sperm DNA quality in white European men seeking medical help for primary couple's infertility? SUMMARY ANSWER: HPV seminal infections involving high-risk (HR) genotypes are associated with impaired sperm progressive motility and sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) values.WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: HPV is commonly present in semen samples. However, whether the presence of HPV in semen is actually associated with impaired sperm parameters and SDF values have yet to be elucidated. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION:In this cross-sectional study, complete demographic, clinical and laboratory data from 729 infertile men were analysed.PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Health-significant comorbidities were scored with the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Serum hormones and SDF index (measured by the sperm chromatin structure assay [SCSA]) were measured in every patient (SDF ≥30% was defined as pathological). Semen analysis was based on 2010 World Health Organisation reference criteria. Amplification by nested PCR was used to detect HPV-DNA sequences in semen samples. Descriptive statistics and linear regression models were used to test the association between the presence of HPV and clinical and seminal characteristics in the whole cohort. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE:The overall rate of HPV positivity was 15.5% (113/729). Overall, 78/729 (10.7%) and 35/729 (4.8%) patients had HR HPV+ and low-risk HPV+, respectively. HPV16 was the most prevalent type (22.1%), followed by HPV43 (10.6%), HPV56 and HPV42 (both 8.8%). No differences were found in terms of clinical and hormonal characteristics between patients with or without seminal HPV. Sperm progressive motility was significantly lower (P = 0.01) while SDF values were higher (P = 0.005) in HPV+ men compared to those with no HPV. In particular, HR HPV+ men had lower sperm progressive motility (P = 0.007) and higher SDF values (P = 0.003) than those with a negative HPV test. Univariable analysis showed that HR HPV+ was associated with impaired sperm progressive motility (P = 0.002) and SDF values (P = 0.003). In the multivariable analysis, age, FSH levels and testicular volume were significantly associated with impaired sperm progressive motility (all P ≤ 0.04). Conversely BMI, CCI, smoking habits and HPV status were not.

No abstract

The increased rate of low-risk PCa detected after BPH surgery in the last decade reflects the clinical practice changes in PCa screening and diagnosis leading to a reduced number of unnecessary biopsies and indolent cancer diagnosis.

ObjectiveTo study the prevalence and the risk associated with prediabetes (PreDM) in primary infertile men. Patients and methodsData from 744 infertile men were analysed. Healthsignificant comorbidities were scored with the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Serum hormones were measured in every man. Semen analysis was based on 2010 World Health Organization (WHO) reference criteria. PreDM was defined according to the clinical criteria detailed by the American Diabetes Association (Diabetes Care 2014; 37 (Suppl. 1): S81). Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses tested the association between PreDM status, hormonal milieu and seminal parameters. The predictive accuracy of all variables was evaluated using the area under the curve, and the clinical net benefit estimated by decision curve analysis (DCA). ResultsOf the 744 men, PreDM was found in 114 (15.4%). Men with PreDM (+PreDM) were older, had higher CCI scores, lower total testosterone and sex hormone-binding globulin but higher follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and 17b-oestradiol values compared to those without PreDM (ÀPreDM) (all P ≤ 0.04). Higher sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI; P = 0.014) and idiopathic non-obstructive azoospermia (iNOA; P < 0.001) were found more frequently in +PreDM men. At multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age, FSH and iNOA (all P ≤ 0.04) were significantly associated with +PreDM status. DCA demonstrated a clinical net benefit in discriminating men at higher risk of a +PreDM status. ConclusionsAbout 15% of primary infertile men had criteria suggestive of undiagnosed PreDM. A PreDM status was associated with a greater risk of hypogonadism, higher DFI values and iNOA status. Age, FSH values and iNOA status could be considered as useful parameters to recognise men with PreDM and implement early preventive interventions in those men at risk of the consequences from poor glycaemic control.

Introduction Hydraulic penile prostheses have shown an overall good mechanical reliability up to 10 years after surgery; however, few data have been published on very long-term follow-up. Aim We looked at long-term (≥15 years) complications, including functional and quality of life (QoL) outcomes, after 3-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation in patients with erectile dysfunction (ED). Methods Data regarding 149 patients submitting to IPP placement before 2001 were analyzed. All patients were implanted with AMS CX and Ultrex Plus 3-piece prostheses. Main Outcome Measure Patients were reassessed to evaluate rates of complications and functional outcomes. The validated questionnaire Quality of Life and Sexuality with Penile Prosthesis (QoLSPP) was used to assess patient QoL. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated the probability of prosthesis survival (defined as working device/not-explanted). Results Median follow-up of 51 patients was 206 months (interquartile range [IQR], 145–257). The etiology of ED was vasculogenic (n = 20; 39%), Peyronie’s disease (n = 15; 29%), pelvic surgery (n = 4; 7.8%), organic other than vasculogenic (n = 3; 5.9%), or other (n = 9; 18%). Throughout the follow-up, 24 patients (49%) experienced complications: mechanical failure (n = 19; 79%), pain (n = 3; 12%), orgasmic dysfunctions (n = 1; 4.5%), or device infection (n = 1; 4.5%). The estimated IPP survival was 53% (95% CI, 36–67) at 20-year follow-up. Baseline characteristics (age, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, and erectile dysfunction etiology) were not significantly associated with the risk of IPP failure over time by Cox regression analysis. At 20-year follow-up, 41% (95% CI, 19–49) of the patients were still using the device. Among them, QoLSPP median domain scores were high: functional 22/25 (IQR, 20–23), relational 17/20 (IQR, 15–18), personal 14/15 (IQR, 12–15), and social 14/15 (IQR, 11–15). Clinical Implications The longevity of the device and long-term satisfaction rates should be comprehensively discussed during patient consultation for IPP surgery. Strengths & Limitations To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting long-term QoL outcomes using a dedicated questionnaire for penile prostheses. The low response rate for the telephone interviews, the retrospective design of the study, and the relatively small number of patients are the main limitations. Conclusion Long-term follow-up data after IPP placement showed that almost half of the devices still worked properly 20 years after the original penile implant, as 60% of patients were still using the device with high satisfaction and adequate QoL outcomes. Both patients and physicians should be aware of the expected life and outcomes of IPP implants.

No abstract

Study Need and Importance: Both Johns Hopkins (JH) high risk (HR) and very high risk (VHR) patients qualify for either radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy (RT) when curative intent is sought. To the best of our knowledge, no population-based analyses tested which treatment modality may hold an advantage regarding cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in this population. We addressed this void on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, and we hypothesized that no CSM difference existed between RP vs RT. Our analyses addressed the entire population of HRDVHR and the 2 separate risks groups. Our analyses distinguished themselves from previous reports by propensity score matching and competing risks regression to address if biases exist between patients undergoing RP vs external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). What We Found: In the combined cohort, 5-year CSM rates were 2.3% for RP vs 4.1% for EBRT and yielded a multivariate hazard ratio of 0.68 (95% CI 0.54e0.86, p <0.001) favoring RP. In VHR patients, 5-year CSM rates were 3.5% for RP vs 6.0 % for EBRT, yielding a multivariate hazard ratio of 0.58 (95% CI 0.44e0.77, p <0.001) favoring RP. Conversely, in HR patients, no significant difference was recorded between RP vs EBRT (HR 0.7, 95% CI 0.39e1.25, p[0.2; see figure). Limitations:The following limitations should be considered. First, since SEER is an observational database, data are retrospective. Second, the SEER database does not include information regarding comorbidities, which could affect treatment assignment. Additionally, SEER lacks earlier cancer-control outcomes, such as biochemical recurrence, progression-free survival or metastatic progression. Moreover, post-procedure complications, side effects, quality of life and other important variables are missing and therefore cannot be assessed. Finally, SEER lacks central pathology review, information on the type and duration of androgen deprivation, and type and dosage of RT.Interpretation for Patient Care: RP holds a CSM advantage over EBRT in the combined HRDVHR cohort and in its subgroup of VHR patients.

We assessed the concomitant impact of cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption in men presenting for primary couple's infertility. Data from 189 infertile men were analyzed. Semen analysis, serum hormones, and sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) were obtained. Smoking status was categorized as follows: current nonsmoker (−S), moderate smoker (+MS), and heavy smoker (+HS). Alcohol consumption was categorized as follows: abstainer (−D), moderate drinker (+MD), and heavy drinker (+HD). Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were applied. Among all the participants, 132 (69.8%), 30 (15.9%), and 27 (14.3%) patients were −S, +MS, and +HS, respectively. In addition, 67 (35.4%), 77 (40.7%) and 45 (23.8%) men were -D, +MD and +HD, respectively. Regarding concomitant habits, 52 (27.5%) patients were nonsmokers and abstainers (−S/−D: Group 1), 91 (48.1%) had at least one recreational habit (−S/+D or +S/−D: Group 2), and 46 (24.3%) were both smokers and drinkers (+S/+D: Group 3). Sperm concentration and progressive motility were lower in +HS and +HD, compared with −S and −D (all P < 0.05), respectively. Similarly, both parameters were significantly lower in Group 3 than Groups 1 and 2 (all P < 0.05). SDF values were higher in Group 3 than Groups 1 and 2 (both P < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels and concomitant +S/+D status were independent predictors of impaired sperm concentration and progressive motility (all P < 0.05). Heavy smoking and heavy drinking were associated with worse seminal parameters than moderate smoking/drinking and nonsmoking/abstaining. When concomitant, +S/+D status has an even greater detrimental effect on semen parameters.