Penile length is preserved after implant surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if there is a correlation between penile size measured preoperatively and erect penis after penile implant surgery (PI). A common cause of patient dissatisfaction after PI is caused by patients complaining that surgery has shortened the penis. It has been suggested that stretched penile length preoperatively is almost the same after surgery when the prosthesis is in erect status. However, no comprehensive data supports this theory. This prospective study was done to investigate this theory. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Standardised measurements of stretched penile length and girth were performed in theatre before PI implantation then re-measured at the end of the procedure with the penis in the erect position. We recorded type of PI, cylinder lengths and malleable rod diameters. All patients had data recorded on body mass index (BMI), hypertension (HTN), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c ), and Peyronie's disease (PD). RESULTS: In all, 133 patients were assessed; 88 (66.2%) had a malleable penile prosthesis (MPP) and 45 (33.8%) an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). The median age and BMI were 56 years and 30 kg/m2 , respectively. In all, 40 (30.1%) patients had HTN, 37 (27.8%) had PD, and 89 (66.9%) were diabetic. The mean (SD) pre-implant stretched length was 12.8 (1.8) cm. The mean (SD) flaccid girth was 10.3 (1.2) cm. Postoperatively, the mean (SD) erect length and girth were 13.1 (1.7) cm and 11.3 (1.3) cm, respectively. Overall, there was a significant (P < 0.05) increase in both the mean (SD) length at +0.36 (0.63) cm, and girth at +1.04 (1.02) cm. Patients who had an IPP, had a greater increase in both length (mean [SD] 0.62 [0.72] cm) and girth (mean [SD] 1.7 [1.0] cm) compared to those who had a MPP (mean [SD] 0.22 [0.53] cm and 0.7 [0.87] cm, respectively) (P < 0.05). We investigated correlations between pre- and postoperative outcomes related to BMI, HTN, diabetes, and PD. None of these variables affected outcome. CONCLUSIONS: PI surgery does not significantly decrease penile size compared to the preoperative assessment. The outcome was not affected by co-morbidities. The preoperative length and girth correlated well with the immediate postoperative erect penis, although girth was not necessarily comparable in this series of patients measured under anaesthesia. Recording penile dimensions in the clinic and agreeing these with patients' preoperatively may be a way of improving satisfaction levels with this surgery.

Predictors of Satisfaction in Men After Penile Implant Surgery.

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.