Urolift After Implant

[twodogs56]

Found this article and decided to pay the $36 for a one time use subscription so I could see the article. It’s a PDF so I posted what my skills allowed. I included a link to JSM where you can read the title but you’ll need to pony up the $36 to see the article. I posted the text and omitted some charts whose function basically summarized the text.
Key sentence: All IPP devices remained functional and none were damaged following the UroLift® procedure.
Would be willing to PM the PDF to a site moderator.

EVALUATION OF SAFETY AND OUTCOMES IN UROLIFT® WITH AN INFLATABLE PENILE PROSTHESIS
Tomer, N.1; Kent, M.1; Valenzuela, R.1
1Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Introduction: UroLift® is a novel minimally invasive treatment for LUTS/BPH which involves the implantation of nitinol anchors in the prostatic urethra to allow for expansion of the urethral lumen. The efficacy and safety of this procedure has been shown, but not specif- ically in the population of patients with an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP).

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of UroLift® in patients with an IPP.
Methods: A retrospective review of charts at a single institution were eval- uated for patients who received a UroLift® following the implantation of an IPP. Preoperative characteristics, procedural details, and postoperative out- comes were evaluated in the patient cohort. Complications from the pro- cedure were also recorded.
Results: 53 patients who received a UroLift® following IPP were identified and evaluated. The mean time from IPP surgery to UroLift® was 50.9 months, the mean pre-procedural prostatic volume was 39.9 cc, and patients received, on average, 4.4 total implants (2.2 in the left and 2.2 in the right lateral lobes). All IPP devices remained functional and none were damaged following the UroLift® procedure. The mean pre-operative IPSS was 17.7 and post- operative IPSS was 5.6. Regarding immediate postoperative outcomes, 11.3% (n1⁄46) patients required immediate postoperative catherization, 1.9% (n1⁄41) developed a post-operative fever, 30.2% (n1⁄416) developed postoperative dysuria, 15.1% (n1⁄48) developed hematuria, 20.8% (n1⁄411) developed transient urgency, 18.9% (n1⁄410) developed transient frequency, and 7.6% (n1⁄44) developed postoperative retention. On average, patients developed approximately 1 post-operative adverse event. Finally, 3.8% (n1⁄42) presented to the emergency room within 90 days, 1.9% (n1⁄41) were admitted within 90 days, and 1.9% (n1⁄41) required cystoscopic removal of a faulty implant.
Conclusion: Urolift® is a safe and effective procedure in patients with an existing IPP. The majority of adverse events were minor and did not require presentation to the emergency room or a hospital admission. Overall, Urolift® leads to significant improvements in IPSS score and is a viable option for patients with an IPP who suffer from BPH.

https://www.jsm.jsexmed.org/article/S1743-6095(21)00139-9/fulltext

[twodogs56]

https://www.jsm.jsexmed.org/article/S1743-6095(21)00139-9/fulltext

Maybe this will work

[twodogs56]

Links don’t seem to be working . Google JSM + urolift + IPP and you should be able to find it