(048) Synchronous Management of Urethral Stricture Disease and Penile Prosthesis Implantation: A Case Series.

Introduction: Urethral stricture disease (USD) is found in approximately 0.9% of all men in developed countries; however, the prevalence of USD is expected to increase with time due to an aging population, a rising incidence of prostate cancer, the use of radiotherapy, and increasing utilization of endoscopic procedures in urology. Due to an increasing prevalence of USD, surgeons may encounter an undiagnosed urethral stricture at increasing rates during penile prosthesis (PP) implantation, and there is currently limited data to evaluate the risk of treating the stricture at that time. Objective: Our study aims to monitor the outcomes of PP placement in the event of a urethral stricture. Methods: A retrospective IRB-approved review (IRB00205900) was performed using the Johns Hopkins EMR for patients that had undergone PP implantation and incidentally found USD at the time of procedure from 2009 to 2023. Patients undergoing PP implantation without incidentally finding USD were excluded. Cases that could proceed as planned were classified as "completed," while cases that could not proceed were classified as "aborted." Stricture characteristics (location, size), procedural information, pertinent demographic data, and comorbidities were noted. Successful management was defined as the absence of complications requiring explantation, including device infection, erosion, or failure, within 90 days of the procedure. Recurrence of stricture was defined as the presence or worsening of obstructive lower urinary symptoms at any post-operative follow-up visits. Results: Of the 2375 PP implantations performed from 2009 to 2023, twenty-four cases were identified in which an incidental USD was found. Out of the twenty-four patients, eighteen patients (75%) had IPPs implanted, while six patients (25%) had their procedures aborted. Of the eighteen patients, thirteen (13/18, 72.2%) underwent urethral dilation with Amplatz dilators, three patients (3/18, 16.7%) had passive dilation with a 16 F flexible cystoscope, and two patients (2/18, 11.1%) received a direct vision internal urethrotomy (DVIU). Within 90 days after the procedure, only one patient presented with urinary retention four days after the procedure (1/18, 5.6%). No PP infections were reported within 90 days in any patient. Only one patient (1/18, 5.6%) had their device explanted due to extrusion five years after the procedure. One patient had a recurrence of their stricture after four years (1/18, 5.6%). Of the six patients that had their procedures aborted, three patients (3/6, 50.0%) underwent urethroplasty. One patient (1/6, 16.7%) underwent urethral dilation and suprapubic tube placement, and two patients (2/6, 33.3%) underwent a DVIU. Five of these six cases had strictures greater than 2 cm with urethral lumens between 8-10F (5/6, 83.3%), while one patient had an obliterated urethra (1/6, 16.7%). Conclusions: This retrospective case study of patients receiving synchronous USD management and PP implantation yielded high success and low complication rates. While a large, multi-institutional study should be performed, our study displays promising results and creates a framework that other surgeons may follow. Disclosure: No. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]