Purpose: We sought to determine whether patients discharged from the hospital without antibiotics after inflatable penile prosthesis insertion were at increased risk for infectious complications compared to patients at our institution discharged with oral antibiotics and patients in other contemporary series.
Materials and methods: We reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent inflatable penile prosthesis insertion from 2013 through 2017. Group 1 patients had no risk factors for infectious complications and did not receive postoperative antibiotics. Group 2 patients had risk factors for infectious complications but did not receive postoperative antibiotics. Group 3 patients had risk factors for infectious complications and received postoperative antibiotics.
Results: Of the 222 men who met study inclusion criteria 88 (40%) were in group 1, 48 (21%) were in group 2 and 86 (39%) were in group 3. The mean ± SD number of risk factors for infection was lower in group 2 than in group 3 (1.08 ± 0.28 vs 1.24 ± 0.46, p = 0.013). Median followup did not vary among groups 1, 2 and 3 (4.6 months, IQR 1.8-7.2; 3.5, IQR 1.4-6.9; and 4.5, IQR 1.4-7.4; p = 0.146, respectively). Rates of explantation due to device infection (0% vs 4% vs 5%, p = 0.130) and nonoperative infectious complications (1% vs 2% vs 2%, p = 0.829) did not vary among groups 1 to 3, respectively.
Conclusions: Patients who undergo inflatable penile prosthesis insertion appeared unlikely to benefit from routine administration of postoperative antibiotics. In the current era of antibiotic stewardship these findings have the potential for substantial individual and population health benefits.
Keywords: anti-bacterial agents; antimicrobial stewardship; penile prosthesis; primary prevention; prosthesis-related infections.