Penile implant usage dates to the 16th century yet penile implants to treat erectile dysfunction did not occur until nearly four centuries later. The modern era of penile implants has progressed rapidly over the past 50 years as physicians' knowledge of effective materials for penile prostheses and surgical techniques has improved. Herein, we describe the history of penile prosthetics and the constant quest to improve the technology. Elements of the design from the first inflatable penile prosthesis by Scott and colleagues and the Small-Carrion malleable penile prosthesis are still found in present iterations of these devices. While there have been significant improvements in penile prosthesis design, the promise of an ideal prosthetic device remains elusive. As other erectile dysfunction therapies emerge, penile prostheses will have to continue to demonstrate a competitive advantage. A particular strength of penile prostheses is their efficacy regardless of etiology, thus allowing treatment of even the most refractory cases.
Biomedical Technology ; Erectile Dysfunction/*surgery/*therapy ; Forecasting ; Humans ; Male ; Penile Implantation/*methods ; Penile Prosthesis/*trends ; Penis/*surgery

Objective: Remote cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) interrogators, originally developed for home use, have been proven to be efficacious in clinical settings, especially emergency departments. Concern exists that attempting to interrogate a CIED with the remote interrogator of a different brand, i.e., a brand-mismatched interrogator, may cause device malfunction. The aim of this study was to determine if intentionally attempting to interrogate a CIED with a brand-mismatched remote interrogator resulted in device malfunction. Methods: A total of 75 ex vivo CIEDs manufactured by various companies underwent attempted interrogation by a brand-mismatched remote interrogator. CIED settings were compared before and after attempted mismatch interrogation. A total of 30 in vivo CIEDs were then randomized for an attempted 2-minute mismatched remote interrogation by one of the two possible mismatched remote interrogators. CIED settings were compared before and after attempted mismatch interrogation. Results: Of 150 ex vivo brand-mismatched interrogations, no device setting changes or malfunctions occurred; no remote interrogators connected to a mismatched CIED, and no devices were turned off. In the 30 patients undergoing brand-mismatched interrogations, the mean (standard deviation) age was 71.6 ( ± 14.7) years, 16 (53%) were male, with 24 pacemakers (80%), four pacemaker/implantable cardioverter defibrillators (13%), and two implantable cardioverter defibrillators (7%). Of the 30 mismatched interrogations performed, no device setting changes or malfunctions occurred; no remote interrogators connected to a mismatched CIED, and no devices turned off. Conclusion In a total 180 attempted brand-mismatched CIED interrogations, no CIED malfunctions occurred. This suggests that the use of remote CIED interrogators when device manufacturer is unknown is unlikely to result in adverse CIED-related events.

Background: The use of translaminar screws may serve as a viable salvage method for complicated cases. To our understanding, the study of the feasibility of translaminar screw insertion in the actual entire subaxial cervical spine has not been carried out yet. The purpose of this study was to report the feasibility of translaminar screw insertion in the entire subaxial cervical spine. Methods: Eighteen cadaveric spines were harvested from C3 to C7 and 1-mm computed tomography (CT) scans and three-dimensional reconstructions were created to exclude any bony anomaly. Thirty anatomically intact segments were collected (C3, 2; C4, 3; C5, 3; C6, 8; and C7, 14), and randomly arranged. Twenty-one segments were physically separated at each vertebral level (group S), while 9 segments were not separated from the vertebral column and left in situ (group N–S). CT measurement of lamina thickness was done for both group S and group N–S, and manual measurement of various length and angle was done for group S only. Using the trajectory proposed by the previous studies, translaminar screws were placed at each level. Screw diameter was the same or 0.5 mm larger than the proposed diameter based on CT measurement. Post-insertion CT was performed. Cortical breakage was checked either visually or by CT. Results: When 1° and 2° screws of the same size were used, medial cortex breakage was found 13% and 33% of the time, respectively. C7 was relatively safer than the other levels. With larger-sized screws, medial cortex breakage was found in 47% and 46% of 1° and 2° screws, respectively. There were no facet injuries due to the screws in group N–S. Conclusions Translaminar screw insertion in the subaxial cervical spine is feasible only when the lamina is thick enough to avoid any breakage that could lead to further complications. The authors do not recommend inserting translaminar screws in the subaxial cervical spine except in some salvage cases in the presence of a thick lamina.

Urologists perform the majority of vasectomies in the United States; however, family medicine physicians (FMPs) perform up to 35%. We hypothesized that differences exist in practice patterns and outcomes between urologists and FMPs. Patients who underwent a vasectomy from 2010 to 2016 were identified. Postvasectomy semen analysis (PVSA) practices were compared between urologists and FMPs, before and after release of the 2012 AUA vasectomy guidelines. From 2010 to 2016, FMPs performed 1435 (35.1%) of all vasectomies. PVSA follow-up rates were similar between the two groups (63.4% vs 64.8%, P = 0.18). Of the patients with follow-up, the median number of PVSAs obtained was 1 (range 1-6) in both groups (P = 0.22). Following the release of guidelines, fewer urologists obtained multiple PVSAs (69.8% vs 28.9% pre- and post-2012, P < 0.01). FMPs had a significant but lesser change in the use of multiple PVSAs (47.5% vs 38.4%, P < 0.01). Both groups made appropriate changes in the timing of the first PVSA, but FMPs continued to obtain PVSAs before 8 weeks (15.0% vs 6.5%, P < 0.01). FMPs had a higher rate of positive results in PVSAs obtained after 8 weeks, the earliest recommended by the AUA guidelines (4.1% vs 1.3%, P < 0.01). Significant differences in PVSA utilization between FMPs and urologists were identified and were impacted by the release of AUA guidelines in 2012. In summary, FMPs obtained multiple PVSAs more frequently and continued to obtain PVSAs prior to the 8-week recommendation, suggesting less penetration of AUA guidelines to nonurology specialties. Furthermore, FMPs had more positive results on PVSAs obtained within the recommended window.
Adult ; Humans ; Male ; Physicians, Family/statistics & numerical data* ; Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data* ; Retrospective Studies ; Urologists/statistics & numerical data* ; Vasectomy/statistics & numerical data* ; Wisconsin