Ischemic priapism is a urological emergency that has been associated with long-standing and irreversible adverse effects on erectile function. Studies have demonstrated a linear relationship between the duration of critically ischemic episodes and the subsequent development of corporal fibrosis and irreversible erectile function loss. Placement of a penile prosthesis is a well-established therapeutic option for the management of erectile dysfunction secondary to ischemic priapism, and will be the focus of this review. Review of the current literature demonstrates a growing utilization of penile prostheses in the treatment of erectile dysfunction secondary to ischemic priapism. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of randomized-controlled trials describing the use of prosthesis in ischemic priapism. As a result, there is a lack of consensus regarding the type of prosthesis (malleable vs. inflatable), timing of surgery (acute vs. delayed), and anticipated complications for each approach. Both types of prostheses yielded comparable complication rates, but the inflatable penile prosthesis have higher satisfaction rates. Acute treatment of priapism was associated with increased risk of prosthetic infection, and could potentially cause psychological trauma, whereas delayed implantation was associated with greater corporal fibrosis, loss of penile length, and increased technical difficulty of implantation. The paucity of high-level evidence fuels the ongoing discussion of optimal use and timing of penile prosthesis implantation. Current guidance is based on consensus expert opinion derived from small, retrospective studies. Until more robust data is available, a patient-centered approach and joint decision-making between the patient and his urologist is recommended.
Consensus ; Emergencies ; Erectile Dysfunction ; Expert Testimony ; Fibrosis ; Humans ; Joints ; Male ; Penile Implantation ; Penile Prosthesis ; Priapism ; Prostheses and Implants ; Psychological Trauma ; Retrospective Studies

Background: s/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is generally diagnosed at an advanced stage, which limits curative treatment options for these patients. Locoregional therapy (LRT) is the standard approach to bridge and downstage unresectable HCC for liver transplantation (LT). Atezolizumab-bevacizumab (atezo-bev) can induce objective responses in nearly one-third of patients; however, the role and outcomes of downstaging using atezo-bev remains unknown. Methods: In this retrospective single-center study, we included consecutive patients between November 2020 and August 2023, who received atezo-bev with or without LRT and were subsequently considered for resection/LT after downstaging. Results: Of the 115 patients who received atezo-bev, 12 patients (10.4%) achieved complete or partial response and were willing to undergo LT; they (age, 58.5 years; women, 17%; Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage system B/C, 5/7) had received 3-12 cycles of atezo- bev, and four of them had received prior LRT. Three patients died before LT, while three were awaiting LT. Six patients underwent curative therapies: four underwent living donor LT after a median of 79.5 days (range, 54-114) following the last atezo-bev dose, one underwent deceased donor LT 38 days after the last dose, and one underwent resection. All but one patient had complete pathologic response with no viable HCC. Three patients experienced wound healing complications, and one required re-exploration and succumbed to sepsis. After a median follow-up of 10 months (range, 4-30), none of the alive patients developed HCC recurrence or graft rejection. Conclusions Surgical therapy, including LT, is possible after atezo-bev therapy in well-selected patients after downstaging.

Background: s/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is generally diagnosed at an advanced stage, which limits curative treatment options for these patients. Locoregional therapy (LRT) is the standard approach to bridge and downstage unresectable HCC for liver transplantation (LT). Atezolizumab-bevacizumab (atezo-bev) can induce objective responses in nearly one-third of patients; however, the role and outcomes of downstaging using atezo-bev remains unknown. Methods: In this retrospective single-center study, we included consecutive patients between November 2020 and August 2023, who received atezo-bev with or without LRT and were subsequently considered for resection/LT after downstaging. Results: Of the 115 patients who received atezo-bev, 12 patients (10.4%) achieved complete or partial response and were willing to undergo LT; they (age, 58.5 years; women, 17%; Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage system B/C, 5/7) had received 3-12 cycles of atezo- bev, and four of them had received prior LRT. Three patients died before LT, while three were awaiting LT. Six patients underwent curative therapies: four underwent living donor LT after a median of 79.5 days (range, 54-114) following the last atezo-bev dose, one underwent deceased donor LT 38 days after the last dose, and one underwent resection. All but one patient had complete pathologic response with no viable HCC. Three patients experienced wound healing complications, and one required re-exploration and succumbed to sepsis. After a median follow-up of 10 months (range, 4-30), none of the alive patients developed HCC recurrence or graft rejection. Conclusions Surgical therapy, including LT, is possible after atezo-bev therapy in well-selected patients after downstaging.

Background: s/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is generally diagnosed at an advanced stage, which limits curative treatment options for these patients. Locoregional therapy (LRT) is the standard approach to bridge and downstage unresectable HCC for liver transplantation (LT). Atezolizumab-bevacizumab (atezo-bev) can induce objective responses in nearly one-third of patients; however, the role and outcomes of downstaging using atezo-bev remains unknown. Methods: In this retrospective single-center study, we included consecutive patients between November 2020 and August 2023, who received atezo-bev with or without LRT and were subsequently considered for resection/LT after downstaging. Results: Of the 115 patients who received atezo-bev, 12 patients (10.4%) achieved complete or partial response and were willing to undergo LT; they (age, 58.5 years; women, 17%; Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage system B/C, 5/7) had received 3-12 cycles of atezo- bev, and four of them had received prior LRT. Three patients died before LT, while three were awaiting LT. Six patients underwent curative therapies: four underwent living donor LT after a median of 79.5 days (range, 54-114) following the last atezo-bev dose, one underwent deceased donor LT 38 days after the last dose, and one underwent resection. All but one patient had complete pathologic response with no viable HCC. Three patients experienced wound healing complications, and one required re-exploration and succumbed to sepsis. After a median follow-up of 10 months (range, 4-30), none of the alive patients developed HCC recurrence or graft rejection. Conclusions Surgical therapy, including LT, is possible after atezo-bev therapy in well-selected patients after downstaging.

Background: s/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is generally diagnosed at an advanced stage, which limits curative treatment options for these patients. Locoregional therapy (LRT) is the standard approach to bridge and downstage unresectable HCC for liver transplantation (LT). Atezolizumab-bevacizumab (atezo-bev) can induce objective responses in nearly one-third of patients; however, the role and outcomes of downstaging using atezo-bev remains unknown. Methods: In this retrospective single-center study, we included consecutive patients between November 2020 and August 2023, who received atezo-bev with or without LRT and were subsequently considered for resection/LT after downstaging. Results: Of the 115 patients who received atezo-bev, 12 patients (10.4%) achieved complete or partial response and were willing to undergo LT; they (age, 58.5 years; women, 17%; Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage system B/C, 5/7) had received 3-12 cycles of atezo- bev, and four of them had received prior LRT. Three patients died before LT, while three were awaiting LT. Six patients underwent curative therapies: four underwent living donor LT after a median of 79.5 days (range, 54-114) following the last atezo-bev dose, one underwent deceased donor LT 38 days after the last dose, and one underwent resection. All but one patient had complete pathologic response with no viable HCC. Three patients experienced wound healing complications, and one required re-exploration and succumbed to sepsis. After a median follow-up of 10 months (range, 4-30), none of the alive patients developed HCC recurrence or graft rejection. Conclusions Surgical therapy, including LT, is possible after atezo-bev therapy in well-selected patients after downstaging.