Does climate impact inflatable penile prosthesis infection (IPP) risk? Assessment of temperature and dew point on IPP infections

Abstract

Background Variations in climate have been associated with a greater risk of surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, and changes in the skin microbiome; however, limited data exist on the impact of climate on inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) infections.Aim We sought to evaluate the impact of climate on the risk of IPP infections in a large international, multicenter cohort.Methods We performed a multi-institutional, retrospective study of patients undergoing IPP surgery. We then evaluated whether the month or season, during which surgery was performed, affected device infections. Implant infections were defined as infections requiring device explantation. A univariate logistic regression analysis was undertaken.Outcomes Our primary outcome was implant infection.Results A total of 5289 patients with a mean age of 62.2 +/- 10.8 years received IPP placement. There was a fairly even distribution of implants performed in each season. A total of 103 (1.9%) infections were recorded. There were 32 (31.1%) IPP infections in patients who underwent surgery in the summer, followed by 28 (27.2%) in the winter, 26 (25.2%) in the spring, and 17 (16.5%) in the fall. No statistically significant differences were recorded in terms of season (P = .19) and month (P = .29). The mean daily temperature (P = .43), dew point (P = .43), and humidity (P = .92) at the time of IPP placement was not associated with infection.Clinical Implications These findings provide reassurance to prosthetic urologists that infection reduction strategies do not need to be tailored to local climate.Strengths and Limitations Climate data were not directly recorded for each hospital, but rather based on the monthly averages in the city where the surgery was performed.Conclusion The climate at time of IPP placement and time of year of surgery is not associated with IPP infection risk.