3D printing, a versatile additive manufacturing technique, has diverse applications ranging from transportation, rapid prototyping, clean energy, and medical devices. The authors focus on how 3D printing technology can enhance the drug discovery process through automating tissue production that enables high-throughput screening of potential drug candidates. They also discuss how the 3D bioprinting process works and what considerations to address when using this technology to generate cell laden constructs for drug screening as well as the outputs from such assays necessary for determining the efficacy of potential drug candidates. They focus on how bioprinting how has been used to generate cardiac, neural, and testis tissue models, focusing on bio-printed 3D organoids. The next generation of 3D bioprinted organ model holds great promises for the field of medicine. In terms of drug discovery, the incorporation of smart cell culture systems and biosensors into 3D bioprinted models could provide highly detailed and functional organ models for drug screening. By addressing current challenges of vascularization, electrophysiological control, and scalability, researchers can obtain more reliable and accurate data for drug development, reducing the risk of drug failures during clinical trials.

Chan JY, et al. Investig Clin Urol. 2020 Aug;62:e24. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.20200319

Introduction: Surgical management via penile prosthesis is an option for patients who have failed medical management. There is a paucity of literature surrounding factors contributing to patient satisfaction after implant surgery. The objective of this study was to characterize patients’ and surgeons’ attitudes toward factors affecting satisfaction with this procedure. Methods: Two patient cohorts were identified and contacted via email: a medical management of erectile dysfunction (ED) cohort and a penile implant patient cohort. A third cohort, Canadian urologists who perform penile implant surgeries, was also contacted. The surveys consisted of 5–7 questions, including a rating question regarding the importance of various penile implant factors. Results: Forty-six ED patients, 45 post-implant patients, and 12 urologists completed the survey. The mean overall satisfaction on a 10-point scale was 6.49 (standard deviation [SD] 2.92). Most (67%) urologists selected patient satisfaction as one of their least favorite aspects of penile implant surgery. Compared to post-implant patients, ED patients reported greater importance in the areas of appearance (p=0.035), soft glans (p=0.040), and concealment of implant (p=0.007). Urologists ranked natural feel (p=0.019) and generating a discrete erection (p=0.022) as less important than patients. Conclusions: This is the first study that examines which specific variables of penile implant surgery are associated with satisfaction while comparing surgeons’ understanding of what patients desire from this surgery. This study identifies several factors deemed important by patients but under-recognized by urologists. This knowledge can aid urologists in optimizing preoperative counselling and improving patient satisfaction.

Prostate cancer (PC) treatment leads to impairment of sexual function. The Prostate Cancer Supportive Care (PCSC) Program’s Sexual Rehabilitation clinic (SRC) assists patients and their partners with sexual recovery using a biopsychosocial approach to rehabilitation. This study characterizes patients seen in the SRC between July 2013–1 July 2019. Data was retrospectively abstracted from clinic records. In total, 965 patients were seen over 3391 appointments during the study period. Median age (standard deviation (SD)) was 66 years (SD = 7.1), 82.0% were partnered, yet 81.7% attended appointments alone. 88.0% were treated with surgery, 5.1% with brachytherapy, 3.7% with external beam radiation (EBRT), 1.8% with combined brachytherapy and EBRT, and 1.4% with androgen deprivation therapy. In total, 708 patients (73.4%) attended ≥1 follow-up appointment. Median time (SD) between end of prostate cancer treatment to first SRC appointment was 270 days (range 0–7766). The mean (SD) self-reported overall sexual satisfaction (extracted from International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5)) significantly increased both with erectile aids (1.69 (SD = 1.52) to 2.26 (SD = 1.66), p < 0.001, n = 148) and without erectile aids (1.71 (SD = 1.44) to 2.35 (SD = 1.57), p < 0.001, n = 235). This study provides guidance for further investigation to refine treatment, wait-times, support, and/or resource offerings in this type of program.