Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal The International Journal of Medical Science and Health Research The Indonesian Journal of General Medicine
M M Afif
Unknown Affiliation
Dentistry Health Professions Medicine & Pharmacology Nursing Public Health Veterinary

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Revisit Perito Implant® Technique : A Narrative Review M M Afif; Nabil Dhiya Ulhaq
The International Journal of Medical Science and Health Research Vol. 8 No. 4 (2025): The International Journal of Medical Science and Health Research
Publisher : International Medical Journal Corp. Ltd

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.70070/k3s3w468

Abstract

Infrapubic penile implant surgery is a viable option for patients with severe penile curvature, shortening, and        impaired penile rigidity due to fibrosis of the corpora cavernosa (Sadeghi-Nejad, 2007). Studies have shown that patients        who undergo penile implant surgery, particularly the infrapubic approach, experience significantly better erectile function and treatment satisfaction compared to those receiving other treatments such as sildenafil citrate and intracavernous prostaglandin E1 (Rajpurkar & Dhabuwala, 2003). The infrapubic approach offers advantages such as ease of reservoir placement, rapid implantation, and direct vision during the procedure, as well as avoiding an extra incision on the scrotum, which can hinder rehabilitation (Montague & Angermeier, 2000; Vollstedt et al., 2017). Additionally, it has     been noted that the infrapubic approach can be quickly learned by urologists who are already comfortable with the transscrotal approach (Kramer & Chason, 2010). However, it is important to consider the drawbacks associated with the infrapubic approach, such as the higher risk of surgical errors during the placement of the device in the corpora (Kramer et al., 2010)
Hybrid Revascularizaton vs Conventional CABG in Triple Vessel Disease: Mini Systematic Review M M Afif; Nabil Dhiya Ulhak; Reyhan Bayu Kenji Harahap; Ni Putu Anindya Divy
The Indonesian Journal of General Medicine Vol. 10 No. 2 (2025): The Indonesian Journal of General Medicine
Publisher : International Medical Journal Corp. Ltd

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.70070/kwkde679

Abstract

Background: Hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR) integrates minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), presenting a viable alternative for managing severe triple-vessel disease (TVD). Although conventional CABG is the benchmark for multivessel disease, HCR has arisen as a method intended to diminish surgical morbidity while preserving long-term revascularisation advantages. This systematic study assesses the long-term clinical results of HCR in comparison to CABG. Methods: A computerised literature search was conducted across three search engines (Google Scholar, PUBMED, Crossref) for the years 2014-2025, with the keywords: CABG, Hybrid, TVD, and Triple Vessel. Quality of studies assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018. Results: Initially, 1339 papers were retrieved; utilizing the PRISM algorithm, 2 articles were ultimately reviewed. Basman et al. (2020) discovered that the 8-year survival rates were comparable between HCR (5.0%) and CABG (4.0%), with no significant disparity in Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) rates. Esteves et al. (2020) observed a greater incidence of adverse events in HCR (19.3%) compared to CABG (5.9%) at two years, primarily due to increased unexpected revascularisation; however, HCR demonstrated feasibility with acceptable safety. Both studies indicated that HCR is most appropriate for specific patients in whom PCI can successfully enhance minimally invasive bypass methods. Conclusions: HCR has benefits like reduced hospital durations and diminished surgical morbidity; however its long-term results do not surpass those of CABG. Increased revascularisation rates in HCR prompt apprehensions over its longevity in comparison to normal CABG. Future extensive randomised trials are necessary to formulate definitive clinical recommendations for patient selection.
Co-Authors Nabil Dhiya Ulhak Nabil Dhiya Ulhaq Ni Putu Anindya Divy Reyhan Bayu Kenji Harahap