Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Does time of intraoperative exposure to the aerobiome increase microbial growth on inflatable penile prostheses?

International Journal of Impotence Research (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation is a surgical approach for the management of erectile dysfunction (ED). A feared complication is IPP infection, and increased operative time is a risk factor for infection. Exposure of an IPP implant to ambient air in the operating room (OR aerobiome) is thought to contribute to risk of infection from increased operative time, but this is not well-supported. The objective of this study was to evaluate if exposure to the OR aerobiome increased microbial colonization of IPPs. This was an ex vivo study using an uncoated IPP, observing standard surgical sterility and OR conditions. A sterile swab was collected every 30 min for 3 h from each IPP component. Positive controls consisted of swabs exposed to unprepped scrotal skin during in-office vasectomies. All swabs underwent quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and next generation sequencing (NGS). Bioinformatic processing was carried out and taxonomic assignment was performed. No microbial growth was detected on any component of the IPPs at any time point, while positive control swabs all detected various skin flora, including bacterial and fungal growth. These findings suggest that exposure to the OR aerobiome does not increase the risk of IPP microbial colonization, at least within a 3-hour period. Further in vivo studies are needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data generated and analyzed during this study can be found within the published article and supplementary material, and additional data as applicable can be produced by the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Kohn TP, Rajanahally S, Hellstrom WJG, Hsieh TC, Raheem OA. Global trends in prevalence, treatments, and costs of penile prosthesis for erectile dysfunction in men. Eur Urol Focus. 2022;8:803–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lux M, Reyes-Vallejo L, Morgentaler A, Levine LA. Outcomes and satisfaction rates for the redesigned 2-piece penile prosthesis. J Urol. 2007;177:262–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Govier FE, Gibbons RP, Correa RJ, Pritchett TR, Kramer-Levien D. Mechanical reliability, surgical complications, and patient and partner satisfaction of the modern three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology. 1998;52:282–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Carson CC 3rd, Mulcahy JJ, Harsch MR. Long-term infection outcomes after original antibiotic impregnated inflatable penile prosthesis implants: up to 7.7 years of followup. J Urol. 2011;185:614–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Grewal S, Vetter J, Brandes SB, Strope SA. A population-based analysis of contemporary rates of reoperation for penile prosthesis procedures. Urology. 2014;84:112–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dhar NB, Angermeier KW, Montague DK. Long-term mechanical reliability of AMS 700CX/CXM inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol. 2006;176:2599–601.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wilson SK, Delk JR, Salem EA, Cleves MA. Long-term survival of inflatable penile prostheses: single surgical group experience with 2,384 first-time implants spanning two decades. J Sex Med. 2007;4:1074–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Henry GD, Donatucci CF, Conners W, Greenfield JM, Carson CC, Wilson SK, et al. An outcomes analysis of over 200 revision surgeries for penile prosthesis implantation: a multicenter study. J Sex Med. 2012;9:309–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Quesada ET, Light JK. The AMS 700 inflatable penile prosthesis: long-term experience with the controlled expansion cylinders. J Urol. 1993;149:46–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jarow JP. Risk factors for penile prosthetic infection. J Urol. 1996;156:402–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Abouassaly R, Angermeier KW, Montague DK. Risk of infection with an antibiotic coated penile prosthesis at device replacement for mechanical failure. J Urol. 2006;176:2471–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Carvajal A, Henry GD. Prevention of Penile Prosthesis Infection. Curr Urol Rep. 2022;23:75–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Baird BA, Parikh K, Broderick G. Penile implant infection factors: a contemporary narrative review of literature. Transl Androl Urol. 2021;10:3873–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Swanton AR, Munarriz RM, Gross MS. Updates in penile prosthesis infections. Asian J Androl. 2020;22:28–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pineda M, Burnett AL. Penile prosthesis infections-a review of risk factors, prevention, and treatment. Sex Med Rev. 2016;4:389–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stocks GW, Self SD, Thompson B, Adame XA, O’Connor DP. Predicting bacterial populations based on airborne particulates: a study performed in nonlaminar flow operating rooms during joint arthroplasty surgery. Am J Infect Control. 2010;38:199–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Song Z, Borgwardt L, Høiby N, Wu H, Sørensen TS, Borgwardt A. Prosthesis infections after orthopedic joint replacement: the possible role of bacterial biofilms. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2013;5:65–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ribeiro M, Monteiro FJ, Ferraz MP. Infection of orthopedic implants with emphasis on bacterial adhesion process and techniques used in studying bacterial-material interactions. Biomatter. 2012;2:176–94.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Titan® Penile Implant [cited 2024 01/02/2024]. Coloplast Titan Product Description]. Available from: https://products.coloplast.co.uk/coloplast/implantable-devices/mens-health/erectile-dysfunction/titan-penile-implant/.

  20. McEvoy JP, Martin P, Khaleel A, Dissanayeke S. Titanium kirschner wires resist biofilms better than stainless steel and hydroxyapatite-coated wires: an in vitro study. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2019;14:57–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Baas W, O’Connor B, Welliver C, Stahl PJ, Stember DS, Wilson SK, et al. Worldwide trends in penile implantation surgery: data from over 63,000 implants. Transl Androl Urol. 2020;9:31–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Rodriguez KM, Kohn TP, Davis AB, Hakky TS. Penile implants: a look into the future. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6:S860–s6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Martinez RM, Bowen TR, Foltzer MA. Prosthetic device infections. Microbiol Spectr. 2016;4.

  24. Mulcahy JJ. Current approach to the treatment of penile implant infections. Ther Adv Urol. 2010;2:69–75.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Eid JF, Wilson SK, Cleves M, Salem EA. Coated implants and “no touch” surgical technique decreases risk of infection in inflatable penile prosthesis implantation to 0.46. Urology. 2012;79:1310–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Napoli C, Tafuri S, Montenegro L, Cassano M, Notarnicola A, Lattarulo S, et al. Air sampling methods to evaluate microbial contamination in operating theatres: results of a comparative study in an orthopaedics department. J Hosp Infect. 2012;80:128–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fernstrom A, Goldblatt M. Aerobiology and its role in the transmission of infectious diseases. J Pathog. 2013;2013:493960.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Sadrizadeh S, Pantelic J, Sherman M, Clark J, Abouali O. Airborne particle dispersion to an operating room environment during sliding and hinged door opening. J Infect Public Health. 2018;11:631–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sunagawa S, Koseki H, Noguchi C, Yonekura A, Matsumura U, Watanabe K, et al. Airborne particle dispersion around the feet of surgical staff while walking in and out of a bio-clean operating theatre. J Hosp Infect. 2020;106:318–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Scigliano NM, Carender CN, Glass NA, Deberg J, Bedard NA. Operative time and risk of surgical site infection and periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Iowa Orthop J. 2022;42:155–61.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Hebert KJ, Kohler TS. Penile prosthesis infection: myths and realities. World J Mens Health. 2019;37:276–87.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Desai Sethi Urology Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA

    Vinayak Madhusoodanan, Maria Camila Suarez Arbelaez, Aymara Evans, Adele Raymo, Maxwell Towe & Ranjith Ramasamy

  2. Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA

    Armin Ghomeshi

  3. Tecnologico de Monterrey, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Nuevo Leon, Mexico

    Beatriz Hernandez

Authors
  1. Vinayak Madhusoodanan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Camila Suarez Arbelaez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aymara Evans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adele Raymo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Armin Ghomeshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Beatriz Hernandez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Maxwell Towe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ranjith Ramasamy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

VM: Experiment Design, Experiment Execution, Result Interpretation, Manuscript Writing, Manuscript Revision. MCSA: Experiment Design, Experiment Execution, Result Interpretation, Manuscript Revision. AE: Experiment Design, Experiment Execution, Result Interpretation, Manuscript Revision. AR: Result Interpretation, Manuscript Writing, Manuscript Revision. AG: Result Interpretation, Manuscript Writing, Manuscript Revision. BH: Result Interpretation, Manuscript Revision. MT: Experiment Design, Result Interpretation, Manuscript Revision. RR: Experiment Design, Result Interpretation, Manuscript Writing, Manuscript Revision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vinayak Madhusoodanan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

RR: Is a consultant and grant recipient of both Coloplast and Boston Scientific.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Madhusoodanan, V., Suarez Arbelaez, M.C., Evans, A. et al. Does time of intraoperative exposure to the aerobiome increase microbial growth on inflatable penile prostheses?. Int J Impot Res (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00906-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00906-6

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links