Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Sex Med ; 15(8): 1180-1186, 2018 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30017718

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Despite the high satisfaction with penile implant (PI) surgery reported in the literature, a significant proportion of patients remain dissatisfied. AIM: To evaluate satisfaction after PI surgery, using a single question and a scoring system. Furthermore, we attempted to define factors that predicted high patient satisfaction. METHODS: The study population consisted of all patients undergoing PI surgery between 2009 and 2015. Comorbidity, demographic, and implant information were recorded. Complications recorded included: minor (requiring no re-operation) such as penile or scrotal hematoma, superficial wound breakdown; major (requiring hospitalization or re-operation) such as device infection, erosion, and mechanical malfunction. Patient satisfaction was defined using a single question posed to the patient 6 months after surgery using a 5-point Likert scale (5 being the most satisfied). Descriptive statistics were used to define complication rates and multivariable analysis (MVA) was performed to define predictors of high satisfaction (score ≥ 4), including presence and degree of complications, Peyronie's disease (PD), diabetes mellitus (DM), number of vascular comorbidities, body mass index (BMI) > 30, and patient age. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Patients with a major complication, with or without an additional minor complication, had a higher likelihood of being dissatisfied (25%) compared to patients with no complication or only minor complication 1.9% (no complications) and 3.7% (only minor complications), P < .001. RESULTS: 902 patients were analysed. Mean age was 56.6 ± 10.6 years. Mean BMI was 30 ± 5. Comorbidity profile was diabetes 75%, dyslipidaemia 44%, hypertension 33%, cigarette smoking 32%, and PD 34%. 76% had a malleable implant (MPP) and 24% an inflatable implant (IPP). 31% had a minor complication and 9% a major complication. 93% had high satisfaction (score ≥4). Patients with any complication had a reduced rate of high satisfaction (97.5% vs 87.7%; P < .001) and even more pronounced with a major complication (96.7% vs 64.2%; P < .001). On MVA, only the absence of a major complication was a significant predictor of high satisfaction (OR 20, 95% CI 9-50, P < .001). CONCLUSION: A high percentage of men are satisfied after penile implant surgery. Only the presence of a major complication is linked to a lower likelihood of achieving high satisfaction. Habous M, Tal R, Tealab A, et al. Predictors of Satisfaction in Men After Penile Implant Surgery. J Sex Med 2018;15:1180-1186.


Assuntos
Satisfação do Paciente , Implante Peniano/psicologia , Prótese de Pênis/psicologia , Adulto , Idoso , Índice de Massa Corporal , Comorbidade , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores Socioeconômicos
2.
Int J Impot Res ; 30(1): 21-26, 2018 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29180797

RESUMO

Accurate data regarding the size of the erect penis is of great importance to several disciplines working with male patients, but little data exists on the best technique to measure penile length. While some previous small studies have suggested good correlation between stretched penile length, others have shown significant variability. Penile girth has been less well studied, and little data exist on the possible errors induced by differing observers and different techniques. Much of the published data report penile length measured from the penopubic skin junction-to-glans tip (STT) rather than pubic bone-to-tip (BTT). We wished to assess the accuracy of different techniques of penile measurements with multiple observers. Men who achieved full erection using dynamic penile Doppler ultrasound for the diagnosis of sexual dysfunction or a desire for objective penile measurement were included in the study. Exclusion criteria were penile scarring, curvature, or congenital abnormality. In each case, the penis was measured by one of the seven andrology specialists in a private air-conditioned (21 °C) environment. Each patient had three parameters measured: circumference (girth) of the penile shaft, length from suprapubic skin-to-distal glans (STT), and pubis-to-distal glans (BTT). The three measurements were recorded in the stretched flaccid state, and the same three measurements were then repeated in the fully erect state, following induction of full erection with intracavernosal injection. We analyzed the accuracy of each flaccid measurement using the erect measurements as a reference, for the overall patient population and for each observer. In total, 201 adult men (mean age 49.4 years) were included in this study. Assessing the penis in the stretched and flaccid state gave a mean underestimate of the erect measurement of ~20% (STT length 23.39%, BTT length 19.86%, and circumference 21.38%). In this large, multicenter, multi-observer study of penis size, flaccid measurements were only moderately accurate in predicting erect size. They were also significantly observer dependent. Measuring penile length from pubic bone to tip of glans is more accurate and reliable, the discrepancy being most notable in overweight patients.


Assuntos
Antropometria/métodos , Pênis/anatomia & histologia , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos Transversais , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tamanho do Órgão , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA