(012) USE OF REAR TIP EXTENDERS IS ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASED RISK OF POST-OPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS AND PENILE PROSTHESIS REVISION IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING PRIMARY INFLATABLE PENILE PROSTHESIS PLACEMENT: RESULTS FROM A LARGE MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COLLABORA

Abstract Introduction The utilization of rear tip extenders (RTE) is often imperative during Inflatable Penile Prosthesis (IPP) placement. The impact of RTE on perioperative morbidity of IPP surgery is underexplored. Objective In this study, we assess intraoperative and postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing primary IPP implantation with or without RTE. Methods We performed a multicenter, retrospective analysis of men undergoing primary IPP placement between July 2016 and July 2021. A total of 4308 patients were identified, of which 2963 had no RTE and 1345 had RTE. After 1:1 propensity score matching for all confounding variables, 840 patients without RTE were compared to patients with RTE for intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Chi-square and Mann–Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis for categorial and continuous variables respectively. For multivariable analysis, we used a forward stepwise model and included significant variables found on preoperative characteristics of patients. Kaplan–Meier time to event analysis were compared with Mantel-Cox log-rank test. Results Patients with RTE use had more postoperative complications (9.6% vs 5.2%, p < 0.001). More specifically, RTE patients had more episodes of postoperative hematoma and bleeding (2.0% vs 0.7%, p = 0.033), device malfunction (2.7% vs 1.8%, p = 0.006), and glans-related complications (0.8% vs 0, p = 0.015). On multivariable analysis, use of RTE (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.07-2.34, p = 0.021), AMS 700 series device (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.27-2.94, p = 0.002), penoscrotal approach (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.61-4.18, p < 0.001), and older age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.04, p = 0.035) were associated with increased risk of postoperative complications. Patients with RTE use had increased rate of postoperative IPP revision (5.0% vs 2.1%, p = 0.002). The use of RTE (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.00-2.90, p = 0.046), AMS 700 series device (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.01-2.97, p = 0.048), penoscrotal approach (OR 3.16, 95% CI 1.63-6.17, p < 0.001), and history of Peyronie’s disease (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.31-3.82, p = 0.003) were associated with increased risk of postoperative IPP revision or explantation. On Kaplan–Meier analysis, use of RTE was associated with increased risk of postoperative complications and IPP revision or explantation within 48 months (log rank p = 0.001 and p = 0.002 respectively). Conclusions In this large multi-institutional cohort, patients with RTE experienced more hematoma, device malfunctioning, and glans related post operative complications. The use of RTE is an independent predictor of post-operative complications and IPP revision or explanation. Disclosure No.