Let’s Make Implantation of Testicular Prostheses in Boys More Standardized and Feasible - Thoughts of Pediatric Urologist - Abstract
Background: There were discussed different aspects of implantation of testicular prostheses in boys with lack of testes, in particular use of Foley’ catheter.
Aim: Determining suitability of the balloon of Foley’s catheter to create space in the scrotum for the placement of a testicular prosthesis
Materials and methods: A study group consisted of 385 boys operated on due to lack of a testis – implanted testicular prostheses. Patients divided into 2 groups: I group consisted of 290 boys, treated 2000 - 2014, silicone gel filled implants, different surgical accesses, II group consisted of 95 boys, treated 2015 - 2020, solid silicone elastomer, one access (supra-scrotal). Every patient has been operated using the Foley’s catheter acting as an expander and hemostatic device. At least 2-year observation period for longterm results, majority of patients were in regular follow-up until adulthood. Late complications: displacement of the prosthesis to the groin, partial unveiling or its prolapse. Statistical analysis using an X2 test.
Materials and methods: A study group consisted of 385 boys operated on due to lack of a testis – implanted testicular prostheses. Patients divided into 2 groups: I group
consisted of 290 boys, treated 2000 - 2014, silicone gel filled implants, different surgical accesses, II group consisted of 95 boys, treated 2015 - 2020, solid silicone elastomer,
one access (supra-scrotal). Every patient has been operated using the Foley’s catheter acting as an expander and hemostatic device. At least 2-year observation period for longterm results, majority of patients were in regular follow-up until adulthood. Late complications: displacement of the prosthesis to the groin, partial unveiling or its prolapse. Statistical analysis using an X2 test.
Results: In I group of patient’s late complications concerned 23 boys (8%). Displacement of the prosthesis to the groin was noted in 14 cases, partial unveiling – 5 cases, prolapse of the prosthesis – 4 cases. Late complications concerned 13% of patients operated on with transverse scrotal incision, 9% - inguinal, 4% - trans-septal scrotal and 3% - supra-scrotal incision. The supra-scrotal incision was the safest access. Late complications in supra-scrotal incision were statistically less frequent then in transverse scrotal one(P= .01).
In II group of patients late complications concerned 4 boys (3%) in form of implant’s displacement.
Clinical Implications: Results and conclusions recognize use of the Foley’s catheter as a gold standard in implantation of testicular prostheses
Strengths & Limitations: This publication and the previous one present and discuss the use of the Foley’s catheter in implantations of testicular prostheses in boys. The survey group is quite large - 385 cases. However, studies were observational, which could have a limiting effect on statistical conclusions
Strengths & Limitations: This publication and the previous one present and discuss the use of the Foley’s catheter in implantations of testicular prostheses in boys. The survey group is quite large - 385 cases. However, studies were observational, which could have a limiting effect on statistical conclusions