Purpose: We aimed to investigate the prevalence and genotype distribution of human papillomavirus (HPV) among Korean males and explore implications for targeted vaccination strategies. Materials and Methods: A total of 44,065 males underwent HPV testing between March 2014 and February 2022 using the Anyplex™ II HPV 28 system, detecting 19 high-risk (HR) and 9 low-risk (LR) HPV types. Additionally, data from 507 male patients at local clinic (2017–2022) were analyzed to compare genotype prevalence between those with (WAT group) and without (WAT X group) genital warts. Results: Overall HPV positivity was 59.1%. HPV 6 (33.3%) and HPV 11 (11.0%) were the most prevalent LR genotypes, while HPV 16 (5.2%) dominated HR infection. Multiple HPV genotype co-infection occurred in 49.3% of positive cases, with 11.3% involving multiple HR types. Younger males (teens, 20s) exhibited higher HR-HPV positivity, although total HPV positivity peaked in the 40s (60.1%). Non–9-valent HR genotypes (HPV 53, 51, 39, 66) accounted for 27.6%–35.0% of infections annually. At local clinic, HPV 43 was significantly associated with genital warts (p=0.017). Conclusions These data support including males in national HPV vaccination strategies using the current 9-valent vaccine and underscore the need for ongoing genotype surveillance to monitor non‑vaccine high‑risk types and inform public health policy, and support inclusion of males in national HPV vaccination strategies using the current 9‑valent vaccine.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Male infertility (MI) and male sexual dysfunction (MSD) can often coexist together due to various interplay factors such as psychosexual, sociocultural and relationship dynamics. The presence of each form of MSD can adversely impact male reproduction and treatment strategies will need to be individualized based on patients’ factors, local expertise, and geographical socioeconomic status. The Asia Pacific Society of Sexual Medicine (APSSM) and the Asian Society of Men’s Health and Aging (ASMHA) aim to provide a consensus statement and practical set of clinical recommendations based on current evidence to guide clinicians in the management of MI and MSD within the Asia-Pacific (AP) region. A comprehensive, narrative review of the literature was performed to identify the various forms of MSD and their association with MI. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for the following English language articles under the following terms: “low libido”, “erectile dysfunction”, “ejaculatory dysfunction”, “premature ejaculation”, “retrograde ejaculation”, “delayed ejaculation”, “anejaculation”, and “orgasmic dysfunction” between January 2001 to June 2022 with emphasis on published guidelines endorsed by various organizations. This APSSM consensus committee panel evaluated and provided evidence-based recommendations on MI and clinically relevant MSD areas using a modified Delphi method by the panel and specific emphasis on locoregional socioeconomic-cultural issues relevant to the AP region. While variations exist in treatment strategies for managing MI and MSD due to geographical expertise, locoregional resources, and sociocultural factors, the panel agreed that comprehensive fertility evaluation with a multidisciplinary management approach to each MSD domain is recommended. It is important to address individual MI issues with an emphasis on improving spermatogenesis and facilitating reproductive avenues while at the same time, managing various MSD conditions with evidence-based treatments. All therapeutic options should be discussed and implemented based on the patient’s individual needs, beliefs and preferences while incorporating locoregional expertise and available resources.

Purpose: To evaluated the efficacy and safety of gelatinized Maca (Lepidium meyenii) for eugonadal patients with late onset hypogonadism symptoms (LOH). Materials and Methods: Participants were instructed to receive 1,000 mg of Maca or placebo, two pills at a time, three times per day for 12 weeks before food intake. To evaluate the efficacy of the drug, Aging Males’ Symptoms scale (AMS), Androgen Deficiency in the Aging Males (ADAM), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaires, serologic tests (total testosterone and free testosterone, total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, low density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride), body weight, and waist circumference were assessed at 4 and 12 weeks after treatment. Results: A total of 80 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to Maca treated group (n=41) or the placebo group (n=39). AMS, IIEF, and IPSS were significantly (p<0.05) improved in Maca treated group than in the placebo group. ADAM positive rate was also significantly (p<0.0001) decreased in Maca treated group. Conclusions Maca may be considered an effective and safe treatment for eugonadal patients with late onset hypogonadism symptoms.

Purpose: This study investigated metabolic health status as a risk factor for female bladder cancer using the National Health Checkups databases of Korea. Materials and Methods: We defined obesity if body mass index was ≥25 kg/m2 and normal weight as <25 kg/m2. Metabolic unhealthiness was defined when 3 or more criteria of metabolic syndrome were met. A total of 11,461,618 women who took National health Checkups between 2009 and 2012 were categorized as metabolic healthy normal weight (MHNW), metabolic unhealthy normal weight (MuHNW), metabolic health obese (MHO), and metabolic unhealthy obese (MuHO). Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression was done to analyze the hazard ratio of bladder cancer. Results: The mean age was 48±11.55 years and body mass index was 23.19±2.13 kg/m2. During 5.4±1.1 years of follow-up, 3,893 patients were newly diagnosed with bladder cancer. Compared to MHNW group, the hazard ratio of MuHNW group and MuHO group were 1.237 and 1.288, respectively, while 0.997 in the MHO group. As the number of metabolic unhealthy criteria increased, the cumulative incidence of bladder cancer increased. Conclusions As a result of a large-scale study conducted on the female population in Korea, the risk of bladder cancer increased with metabolic unhealthiness. Even with normal weight, if metabolically unhealthy, the risk of bladder cancer increased. The greater the degree of metabolic unhealthiness, the higher the risk of bladder cancer. Education on metabolic healthiness concerning female bladder cancer is necessary.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the electromagnetic-type low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (Li-ESWT) in patients with erectile dysfunction (ED).MATERIALS AND METHODS: The randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind prospective study was performed at two referral hospitals. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive sham or Li-ESWT for 6 weeks. ED was evaluated at screening and at 4 and 7 weeks after treatment. Participants were asked to complete the international index of erectile function-erectile function (IIEF-EF) domain questionnaire, erection hardness scale (EHS), and sexual encounter profile questionnaire (SEPQ 2 and 3). The development of complications was investigated.RESULTS: Eighty-one of 96 patients completed the study. The median change in the IIEF-EF score in the Li-ESWT and sham groups was 5.1 and −2.2 (p<0.001), respectively, at the 7-week follow-up; 47.4% (18/38) patients had EHS <3, of which 77.8% (14/18) showed significant improvement in virtue of Li-ESWT treatment (p=0.001). A significant improvement was observed in the percentage of “Yes” responses to SEPQ 2 and 3 in the Li-ESWT group vs. sham group from baseline to 7-week follow-up (91.3% vs. 69.4%; p=0.008 and 50.0% vs. 14.3%; p=0.002, respectively). No patients reported pain or other adverse events during treatment or follow-up.CONCLUSIONS: Thus, Li-ESWT could have a role in improving erectile function. Furthermore, it is safe. We believe that Li-ESWT is an attractive new treatment modality for patients with ED.