{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,29]],"date-time":"2026-04-29T14:02:00Z","timestamp":1777471320783,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":20,"publisher":"Oxford University Press (OUP)","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,7]],"date-time":"2026-01-07T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1767744000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/pages\/standard-publication-reuse-rights"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,7]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Concerns exist regarding inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement after transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter (TC-AUS) surgery due to potential risk of damaging the AUS cuff during corporal dilation and device placement.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Aim<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To evaluate perioperative complications, infections, revision rates, and device longevity in patients undergoing IPP placement following prior TC-AUS surgery.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We present a case series of men who underwent IPP surgery with an existing TC-AUS in place. A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who underwent TC-AUS placement at a single tertiary institution between 2015 and 2025. Patients who subsequently received IPP surgery were identified. Standard IPP techniques were used with additional precautions to protect the AUS, including use of electrocautery instead of sharp dissection and contralateral reservoir placement. Demographics, operative details, complications, infections, revision events, and device survival were collected through review of operative notes and patient records.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Outcomes<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Primary outcomes included intra-operative difficulties, perioperative complications, infection and erosion rates, and revision or failure rates for both the TC-AUS and IPP devices.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Among 757 TC-AUS placements, 17 patients subsequently underwent IPP surgery. Seven patients (41%) had a history of pelvic irradiation. The median operative time for IPP placement was 83\u00a0minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 68-87), and median follow-up was 31.5\u00a0months (IQR 11.2-40.6). All reservoirs were positioned contralateral to the AUS reservoir. A 12 Fr catheter was left postoperatively in 10 patients (59%) for &amp;lt;24\u00a0hours. Proximal corporal dilation was noted to be challenging in 3 patients (18%) but dilation was completed without cuff injury or corporal perforation. One patient (6%) had TC-AUS cuff erosion 9.5\u00a0months after IPP surgery; one patient (6%) experienced TC-AUS device infection 11.5\u00a0months after IPP surgery when his AUD pump eroded through the scrotum. Four patients (24%) developed AUS mechanical failure due to cuff leak at a median of 31.9\u00a0months after IPP placement (39.9\u00a0months post-AUS).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Clinical implications<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>IPP implantation following TC-AUS can be performed safely using careful surgical technique, though vigilance for later AUS mechanical failure is warranted.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Strengths and limitations<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>This study represents one of the largest single-institution series evaluating IPP after TC-AUS and includes detailed operative and follow-up data. However, its retrospective design, small cohort size, and limited follow-up duration restrict generalizability.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>IPP placement after TC-AUS appears safe, with low infection and erosion rates, though AUS cuff leaks may occur more frequently than when either device is implanted alone.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1093\/jsxmed\/qdaf353","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,12,5]],"date-time":"2025-12-05T13:44:04Z","timestamp":1764942244000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Cuff conundrum: inflatable penile prosthesis surgery in men who have transcorporal artificial urinary sphincters"],"prefix":"10.1093","volume":"23","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-5033-6774","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Garrett","family":"Ungerer","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, MN 55905 ,","place":["United States"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Tobias S","family":"K\u00f6hler","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, MN 55905 ,","place":["United States"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sevann","family":"Helo","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, MN 55905 ,","place":["United States"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Matthew J","family":"Ziegelmann","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, MN 55905 ,","place":["United States"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Daniel","family":"Elliott","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, MN 55905 ,","place":["United States"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,7]]},"reference":[{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1206","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-5347(01)63557-2","article-title":"Mayo Clinic long-term analysis of the functional durability of the AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter: a review of 323 cases","volume":"159","author":"Elliott","year":"1998","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"36","DOI":"10.1159\/000019817","article-title":"A review of the complications and results of implantation of the AMS artificial urinary sphincter","volume":"35","author":"Hajivassiliou","year":"1999","journal-title":"Eur Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"536","DOI":"10.1111\/iju.12392","article-title":"Artificial urinary sphincter for post-prostatectomy incontinence: a review","volume":"21","author":"James","year":"2014","journal-title":"Int J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref4","first-page":"217","article-title":"Artificial urinary sphincter implants in men: a National Health Care Data System-Based Study to assess reinterventions in France","volume":"213","author":"Lenfant","year":"2025","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"67","DOI":"10.1093\/jsxmed\/qdad154","article-title":"Evaluation of patient satisfaction using the validated French version of the SSIPI questionnaire after inflatable penile implantation","volume":"21","author":"Beirnaert","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Sex Med"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41443-025-01108-4","article-title":"Penile prosthesis implantation: a systematic review of intraoperative and postoperative complications","author":"Cocci","year":"2025","journal-title":"Int J Impot Res"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41443-025-01165-9","article-title":"Removal rate and mechanical failure in penile prosthesis implantation: a systematic review","author":"Lo Re","year":"2025","journal-title":"Int J Impot Res"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"102","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-5347(17)44745-8","article-title":"Incorporation of corpora cavernosa in bulbous urethral artificial urinary sphincter","volume":"136","author":"Nelson","year":"1986","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1163","DOI":"10.1111\/bju.12386","article-title":"Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter implantation as a salvage surgical procedure for challenging cases of male stress urinary incontinence: surgical technique and functional outcomes in a contemporary series","volume":"112","author":"Wiedemann","year":"2013","journal-title":"BJU Int"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"618","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2015.05.023","article-title":"Artificial urinary sphincter outcomes in the \u201cfragile urethra\u201d","volume":"86","author":"Hoy","year":"2015","journal-title":"Urology"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4449","DOI":"10.1007\/s00345-021-03783-6","article-title":"Transcorporal vs. bulbar artificial urinary sphincter implantation in male patients with fragile urethra","volume":"39","author":"El-Akri","year":"2021","journal-title":"World J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1756","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2014.06.088","article-title":"Artificial urinary sphincter placement in compromised urethras and survival: a comparison of virgin, radiated and reoperative cases","volume":"192","author":"McGeady","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"628","DOI":"10.21037\/tau.2017.07.32","article-title":"The penoscrotal surgical approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement","volume":"6","author":"Gupta","year":"2017","journal-title":"Transl Androl Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"141","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2018.07.046","article-title":"A contemporary analysis of dual inflatable penile prosthesis and artificial urinary sphincter outcomes","volume":"201","author":"Patel","year":"2019","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"782","DOI":"10.1016\/j.sxmr.2022.08.003","article-title":"Synchronous surgical Management of Erectile Dysfunction and Stress Urinary Incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of reoperation rates","volume":"10","author":"Pyrgidis","year":"2022","journal-title":"Sex Med Rev"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2183","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2013.06.084","article-title":"Combined inflatable penile prosthesis-artificial urinary sphincter implantation: no increased risk of adverse events compared to single or staged device implantation","volume":"190","author":"Segal","year":"2013","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"78","DOI":"10.1038\/s41443-023-00718-0","article-title":"Simultaneous implant of inflatable penile prosthesis and artificial urinary sphincter: a single high-volume center experience","volume":"37","author":"Van Huele","year":"2025","journal-title":"Int J Impot Res"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"56","DOI":"10.21037\/tau.2019.08.02","article-title":"Long-term device survival and quality of life outcomes following artificial urinary sphincter placement","volume":"9","author":"Boswell","year":"2020","journal-title":"Transl Androl Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1523","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2015.10.084","article-title":"Artificial urinary sphincter mechanical failures-is it better to replace the entire device or just the malfunctioning component?","volume":"195","author":"Linder","year":"2016","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"key":"2026010707441556600_ref20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1432","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jsxm.2016.06.013","article-title":"Is risk of artificial urethral sphincter cuff erosion higher in patients with penile prosthesis?","volume":"13","author":"Sundaram","year":"2016","journal-title":"J Sex Med"}],"container-title":["The Journal of Sexual Medicine"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/jsm\/article-pdf\/23\/2\/qdaf353\/66290520\/qdaf353.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/jsm\/article-pdf\/23\/2\/qdaf353\/66290520\/qdaf353.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,7]],"date-time":"2026-01-07T12:44:26Z","timestamp":1767789866000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/jsm\/article\/doi\/10.1093\/jsxmed\/qdaf353\/8416283"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,7]]},"references-count":20,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,7]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/jsxmed\/qdaf353","relation":{},"ISSN":["1743-6095","1743-6109"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1743-6095","type":"print"},{"value":"1743-6109","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published-other":{"date-parts":[[2026,2]]},"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,7]]},"article-number":"qdaf353"}}