Assuntos
Gangrena , Implante Peniano , Pênis , Humanos , Masculino , Gangrena/cirurgia , Gangrena/etiologia , Pênis/cirurgia , Implante Peniano/métodos , Implante Peniano/efeitos adversos , Doenças do Pênis/cirurgia , Doenças do Pênis/etiologia , Doenças do Pênis/prevenção & controle , Prótese de Pênis , Fatores de Risco , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controleRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction can cause self-withdrawal and decreased quality of life. Patients who do not respond to pharmacological therapy and other conservative treatments are urged to undergo penile prosthesis implantation. Malleable penile prosthesis was the first prosthesis developed, but then inflatable penile prosthesis was developed to give a more natural erection. There is no meta-analysis comparing inflatable and malleable penile prostheses in terms of safety and efficacy. This study is conducted to evaluate patient and partner satisfaction, ease of use, mechanical failure, and infection rate in patients who underwent penile prosthesis implantation. METHOD: This meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocols. Five eligible studies were included from Pubmed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and SemanticScholar databases. RESULT: In this study, patient and partner satisfaction are significantly better (OR 3.39, 95% CI 1.66-6.93, p = 0.0008) (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.75-3.08, p < 0.00001). Mechanical failure is also significantly higher in inflatable penile prostheses (OR 5.60, 95% CI 2.02-15.53, p = 0.0009). There is no significant difference in terms of ease of use and infection rate in inflatable or malleable penile prostheses. CONCLUSIONS: This study concluded that inflatable penile prosthesis is better in terms of patient and partner satisfaction, but mechanical failures occur more frequently in this type of prosthesis.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Satisfação do Paciente , Implante Peniano , Prótese de Pênis , Desenho de Prótese , Humanos , Masculino , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Prótese de Pênis/efeitos adversos , Implante Peniano/métodos , Implante Peniano/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Qualidade de Vida , Falha de PróteseRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: In cases of a noninfected malfunctioning inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) device, surgeons often opt to exchange all of the device rather than the defective component for fear of an increased infection rate and future mechanical dysfunction. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether partial-component exchange of an IPP device has comparable outcomes to complete explant and replacement of an IPP device with or without a retained reservoir. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR guidelines. Searches were performed on MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, and the Cochrane Library from inception to June 2023, identifying studies reporting outcomes and complications of revision surgery for noninfected malfunctioning IPP devices. Three groups were compared: those undergoing single- or 2-component exchange, those with complete explantation and replacement, and those with replacement of all components while retaining the primary reservoir. RESULTS: Analysis included 11 articles comprising 12 202 patients with complete device replacement, 234 with partial device exchange, and 151 with retained reservoirs following revision. Mean ages ranged from 62 to 68 years, with median follow-up times between 3 and 84 months. Partial-component exchange showed a higher infection rate (6.3%) as compared with complete replacement (2.7%) and reservoir retention (3.9%). Similarly, partial exchange had a higher complication rate (23.9%) when compared with complete replacement (11.3%) and reservoir retention (19.6%). Mechanical failure rates for partial exchange were similar across the 3 groups (10%, 2.8%, and 5.8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Partial-component exchange during IPP revision is associated with higher infection and perioperative complication rates but comparable rates of mechanical failure as compared with complete-component replacement, with or without retaining the original reservoir.
Assuntos
Prótese de Pênis , Reoperação , Humanos , Masculino , Falha de Prótese , Implante Peniano/métodos , Remoção de DispositivoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: First-line treatment options for patients with erectile dysfunction whose medical management has failed include the inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Many patients with an IPP require subsequent urologic surgery, during which the reservoir of the IPP can be injured. OBJECTIVES: This review aims to present a summary of current literature related to iatrogenic injuries to the IPP sustained during urologic surgery. METHODS: Two reviewers independently performed a systematic search on PubMed using standardized search terms to identify pertinent articles. After preliminary review, relevant studies were analyzed to identify the presence of perioperative complications resulting in IPP reservoir injury. Results were categorized by surgical procedures. RESULTS: Among 13 articles included, all were based on urologic surgery. Four studies identified IPP reservoir injury as a result of surgical injury. Of these, injuries occurred during radical prostatectomy (n = 3) and prostatic urethral lift surgery (UroLift, n = 1). Most radical prostatectomy studies without IPP reservoir injuries also described intentional surgical techniques that were employed to prevent reservoir damage, including modulation of reservoir inflation-deflation (n = 3), temporary reservoir repositioning (n = 1), or reservoir capsule dissection to improve visualization (n = 1). Findings from an additional novel case report on IPP injury during a UroLift procedure are presented in this review. CONCLUSION: Approximately one-third of studies identified intraoperative IPP reservoir injury as a significant complication of urologic surgery, particularly during radical prostatectomy. Novel case report findings also contribute the only other case of IPP reservoir damage sustained from delivery of UroLift implants. Findings are used to create a standardized surgical checklist that guides perioperative planning measures prior to pursuing surgery in adjacent spaces.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Doença Iatrogênica , Implante Peniano , Prótese de Pênis , Humanos , Masculino , Prótese de Pênis/efeitos adversos , Implante Peniano/efeitos adversos , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Prostatectomia/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Plaque incision and grafting (PEG) is a primary surgical therapy for severe penile curvature in Peyronie's disease (PD); However, it can increase the risk of erectile dysfunction (ED), particularly in patients with pre-operative mild ED. Soft penile prosthesis (SPP) implantation is a viable treatment option in such cases. This study aims to compare the outcomes of PEG-only approach to PEG plus SPP implantation. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2019, 32 patients with PD and mild ED (5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function scores: 17-21) underwent PEG surgery. Two groups were defined based on the surgery type: PEG-only and PEG plus SPP. The long-term outcomes included correction of penile bending, erection quality, intercourse ability, penile length and sensitivity. The overall satisfaction and impact of surgery on sexual activity and quality of life were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 32 patients, 13 (40.6%) underwent PEG-only surgery, whereas 19 (59.4%) underwent PEG plus SPP. No significant differences were noted between the groups regarding pre-operative characteristics (all p > 0.1) or intra- and post-operative complication rates (all p > 0.2). The median patch area was larger in the PEG-only group (28 cm2 vs. 16.2 cm2; p = 0.001), whereas patients in the PEG plus SPP group were more likely to receive a single patch implant (100% vs. 53.8%; p < 0.001). The penile length increased in 18 patients (61.6%), with significant differences between the two groups (30% vs. 81.2%; p = 0.03). Overall, 14 patients (53.8%) reported greater satisfaction with their sexual life post-operatively, with comparable rates between the groups (p = 0.2). No significant differences were found in the post-operative 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function scores or severe post-operative ED (all p > 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: SPP placement during corporoplasty in patients with mild ED is safe and feasible, and it may be a suitable option for patients uncertain about inflatable prosthesis placement. The use of SPP resulted in longer penile lengths and necessitated smaller grafts. However, further data are required to understand the long-term clinical implications of this approach.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Implante Peniano , Induração Peniana , Prótese de Pênis , Humanos , Masculino , Induração Peniana/cirurgia , Induração Peniana/complicações , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Implante Peniano/métodos , Desenho de Prótese , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Estudos Retrospectivos , Adulto , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos Masculinos/métodos , Resultado do TratamentoAssuntos
Implante Peniano , Humanos , Masculino , Implante Peniano/efeitos adversos , Implante Peniano/métodos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Pênis/irrigação sanguínea , Pênis/cirurgia , Pênis/lesões , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Prótese de PênisRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The salvage procedure for infected penile implants (IPs) has been a subject of interest since its inception in the late 1980s, yet its widespread adoption remains limited. The aim of this study was to realize a systematic literature review to provide a comprehensive analysis of salvage techniques for IPs and assess their efficacy, specifically focusing on functional success. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, employing Mesh terms related to penile prosthesis, penile implant, infection, and salvage procedures. Articles in French or English were considered for the final analysis, with exclusion of literature reviews. RESULTS: Fifteen articles detailing various salvage techniques for IPs were identified. Mulcahy's initial technique was described in 1996, and consisted of complete removal of infected components, extensive lavage, and subsequent replacement with a similar implant. Success rates ranged from 80% to 100%, with emerging trends favoring the use of malleable implants during salvage. Unfortunately, functional data remained limited. When salvage penile prosthesis placement involved a malleable prosthesis, between 20% and 33% of patients underwent conversion to hydraulic prosthesis. CONCLUSION: The salvage procedure for infected penile implants is a reliable method, with success rates surpassing 80%. The need for comparative studies assessing the type of implant used during salvage is required to tailor conservative management strategies for optimal patient outcomes. Finally, few data have been published regarding subsequent conversions from malleable penile implants to hydraulic penile implants after salvage.
Assuntos
Prótese de Pênis , Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese , Terapia de Salvação , Humanos , Masculino , Terapia de Salvação/métodos , Prótese de Pênis/efeitos adversos , Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento , Implante Peniano/métodos , Remoção de DispositivoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: With 50 years' experience, inflatable penile implants are the preferred option for erectile dysfunction refractory to pharmacological and mechanical treatment. Technical and surgical improvements have optimized patient success and satisfaction. However, multi-factorial dissatisfaction persists. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to provide an overview of available technological improvements and innovations, as well as the perioperative management and complications of inflatable penile implant surgery. METHOD: A literature review was carried out over the last twenty years to answer 4 questions: what are the different inflatable penile implants available in 2023, for which indications, results and complications. RESULTS: Four companies propose inflatable penile implants in France. The main improvements have been in the various components of the prosthesis with better cylinder extension, more ergonomic reservoirs, and more manageable pumps, leading to a better durability. Indications have been extended to patients suffering from Peyronie's disease and in emergency cases of priapism. In response to demand from the transgender population, specific phalloplasty implants have been developed. New options are being developed for difficult cases of retracted penis. Results show a high satisfaction rate. Currently the main challenge is the management of infection with the development of rescue protocols using antibiotics to preserve implants - or replace them in a single operation. CONCLUSION: After 50years' experience, improvements in penile implants led to effective, satisfactory and safe treatment and can be proposed in new indications. Further development is sill necessary to offer solutions in difficult cases.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Prótese de Pênis , Desenho de Prótese , Humanos , Masculino , França , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Implante Peniano/métodos , História do Século XX , História do Século XXI , Satisfação do PacienteRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the incremental downstream revenue generated from subsequent treatment of men who received an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) to treat erectile dysfunction (ED), compared to men without ED. METHODS: The 100% Medicare Standard Analytic Files were used to conduct a retrospective claims analysis of the 5-year revenue generated by patients receiving IPP to treat their ED, compared to a propensity-matched cohort of men without ED. Men aged 65 years or older with ED who underwent IPP implantation (Current Procedural Terminology 54405) in a hospital outpatient setting between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2021, and who had continuous Medicare Parts A and B enrollment for 12 months pre-index IPP and 5 years post-index IPP discharge date were included in the study. Men without ED but with comparable characteristics were identified and used as a comparator group. Revenue received by hospitals from Medicare was defined as the sum of payments for patient services, other payor-paid amounts, patient deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance. Revenue was inflated to 2022 US dollars. The mean values and their corresponding standard deviations (SD) are reported. RESULTS: After matching, there were 2905 men with ED who received an IPP and 7462 men without ED. The IPP cohort showed a significantly higher 5-year cumulative revenue (mean=$34,571 [SD=$50,234]) compared to the men without ED (mean=$3189 [SD=$11,527]). When stratified by diagnosis type, the differences in revenue were $10,258 for circulatory disease, $2646 for diabetes, $2013 for urology, and $1043 for prostate cancer. Significantly more IPP patients had at least 1 health encounter for these conditions over the 5-year follow-up period than their matched controls (55.0% vs 7.8% for circulatory, 46.7% vs 16.8% for urology, 19.3% vs 3.6% for diabetes, and 19.0% vs 3.0% for prostate cancer). CONCLUSION: Men with ED who received IPP generated substantially higher revenue for the healthcare system over a 5-year period, nearly 10 times as much, compared to men without ED, excluding the initial cost of the IPP procedure. The presence of ED, coupled with IPP usage, is associated with significantly increased healthcare revenue across a range of medical conditions compared to men without ED. These findings emphasize the financial implications for advanced ED programs to improve access to necessary care for these patients. Healthcare facilities may leverage these insights to effectively allocate resources to deliver critical healthcare to men with ED.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Medicare , Prótese de Pênis , Humanos , Masculino , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Disfunção Erétil/economia , Estados Unidos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Idoso , Prótese de Pênis/economia , Medicare/economia , Implante Peniano/economia , Desenho de Prótese , Idoso de 80 Anos ou maisRESUMO
PURPOSE: About 10% of Peyronie's patients are complex cases with severe curvature (>60 degrees), ventral plaque, multiplanar curvature, hour-glass/hinge deformity, notching deformity, and ossified plaque. In patients with complex Peyronie's disease (PD), different techniques (shortening procedures, lengthening procedures, and penile prosthesis implantation (IPP)) may be necessary to achieve successful result. This review aims to analyze the various surgical techniques employed in the management of Peyronie's disease, with a specific focus on patients with complex deformity. METHODS: Articles focusing on the surgical management of complex curvature in Peyronie's disease were searched in MEDLINE and PubMed published between 1990 and 2023. RESULTS: Shortening procedures are linked to penile shortening and are not recommended for complex cases such as notching, hour-glass deformity, or ossified plaque. Lengthening procedures are suitable for addressing complex curvatures without erectile dysfunction (ED) and are a more appropriate method for multiplanar curvatures. Penile prosthesis implantation (IPP), with or without additional procedures, is the gold standard for patients with ED and Peyronie's disease. IPP should also be the preferred option for cases of penile instability (hinge deformity) and has shown high satisfaction rates in all complex cases. CONCLUSION: While surgical interventions for complex curvature in Peyronie's disease carry inherent risks, careful patient selection, meticulous surgical techniques, and post-operative care can help minimize complications and maximize positive outcome.
Assuntos
Implante Peniano , Induração Peniana , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos Masculinos , Humanos , Induração Peniana/cirurgia , Masculino , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos Masculinos/métodos , Implante Peniano/métodos , Pênis/cirurgia , Prótese de PênisRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Refractory priapism, characterized by persistent and prolonged painful erections despite initial treatment maneuvers, can significantly impair erectile function secondary to ischemia-induced corporal tissue fibrosis. These patients will likely require subsequent penile prosthesis (PP) surgery to regain sexual activity, yet consensus regarding the optimal timing of implantation remains lacking. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes associated with early vs delayed PP implantation in individuals with priapism-induced erectile dysfunction (ED). METHODS: We included studies that focused on refractory priapism leading to ED and its management with PP implantation. We assessed cohort study bias with a risk-of-bias tool and case series bias with the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were calculated by a fixed-effect model. RESULTS: We included 9 studies, comprising 4 cohort studies and 5 case series, involving a total of 278 patients. Total complications were higher in the delayed group (OR, 4.16; 95% CI, 2.77-6.26). Fibrosis was significantly more pronounced in the delayed group (OR, 118.18; 95% CI, 20.06-696.32). The odds of erosion, infections, and penile injury did not show statistically significant differences between the groups (OR, 2.52 [95% CI, 0.67-9.49], 0.89 [0.38-2.10], 1.83 [0.79-4.26], respectively). Patients' satisfaction resulted in a pooled OR of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.04-0.49) in favor of the early PP insertion group. CONCLUSION: The results from this study favor an early approach to ED (within 30 days) following ischemic priapism. However, it is important to consider patients' preferences, values, and psychological factors to make an informed decision.
Assuntos
Implante Peniano , Prótese de Pênis , Priapismo , Humanos , Masculino , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Priapismo/complicações , Priapismo/cirurgia , Fatores de Tempo , Tempo para o TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The acquisition of skills in penile prosthesis surgery has many limitations mainly due to the absence of simulators and models for training. Three-dimensional (3D) printed models can be utilized for surgical simulations, as they provide an opportunity to practice before entering the operating room and provide better understanding of the surgical approach. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate and validate a 3D model of human male genitalia for penile prosthesis surgery. METHODS: This study included 3 evaluation and validation stages. The first stage involved verification of the 3D prototype model for anatomic landmarks compared with a cadaveric pelvis. The second stage involved validation of the improved model for anatomic accuracy and teaching purposes with the Rochester evaluation score. The third stage comprised validation of the suitability of the 3D prototype model as a surgical simulator and for skill acquisition. The third stage was performed at 3 centers using a modified version of a pre-existing, validated questionnaire and correlated with the Rochester evaluation score. OUTCOME: We sought to determine the suitability of 3D model for training in penile prosthesis surgery in comparison with the available cadaveric model. RESULTS: The evaluation revealed a high Pearson correlation coefficient (0.86) between questions of the Rochester evaluation score and modified validated questionnaire. The 3D model scored 4.33 ± 0.57 (on a Likert scale from 1 to 5) regarding replication of the relevant human anatomy for the penile prosthesis surgery procedure. The 3D model scored 4.33 ± 0.57 (on a Likert scale from 1 to 5) regarding its ability to improve technical skills, teach and practice the procedure, and assess a surgeon's ability. Furthermore, the experts stated that compared with the cadaver, the 3D model presented greater ethical suitability, reduced costs, and easier accessibility. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A validated 3D model is a suitable alternative for penile prosthesis surgery training. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This is the first validated 3D hydrogel model for penile prosthesis surgery teaching and training that experts consider suitable for skill acquisition. Because specific validated guidelines and questionnaires for the validation and verifications of 3D simulators for penile surgery are not available, a modified questionnaire was used. CONCLUSION: The current 3D model for penile prosthesis surgery shows promising results regarding anatomic properties and suitability to train surgeons to perform penile implant surgery. The possibility of having an ethical, easy-to-use model with lower costs and limited consequences for the environment is encouraging for further development of the models.
Assuntos
Modelos Anatômicos , Implante Peniano , Prótese de Pênis , Humanos , Masculino , Implante Peniano/métodos , Implante Peniano/educação , Cadáver , Treinamento por Simulação/métodos , Impressão Tridimensional , Competência Clínica/normasRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To create a society position statement on common adjunct penile prosthesis (PP) procedures. While the Medicare Current Procedural Terminology code book lists descriptions of procedures, it is very brief and lacks detail in the small subspecialty of prosthetic urology. At educational/research meetings, wide variation was found in how experts in prosthetic urology code the same procedures, and need for a standardized format in billing common ancillary surgery was voiced. METHODS: A subcommittee within the Society of Urologic Prosthetic Surgeons developed a survey assessing coding options for several procedures commonly adjunct to PP placement, which was distributed in the fall of 2022. The results of the survey were used to develop consensus statements on coding adjunct PP procedures; statements were distributed among society membership and meetings for approval. RESULTS: Thirty members replied to the survey; demographics were obtained as follows: 73% were trained in a fellowship, 50% identified as university/academic practitioners, and 50% in community/private practice; and 63% respondents place more than 50 implants annually. Only 1 of the 30 respondents stated confidence in coding for these ancillary procedures. Specifically, differences in how to code curvature correction procedures were observed throughout the survey results. CONCLUSION: Only 1 in 30 prosthetic urologists expressed confidence in coding and billing of adjunct PP procedures, further confirming the need for a society position statement. Therefore, we generated a consensus society position statement on common surgeries that are adjunct to PP placement.
Assuntos
Implante Peniano , Prótese de Pênis , Sociedades Médicas , Urologia , Masculino , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Codificação Clínica/normas , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Prótese de Pênis , Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prótese de Pênis/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese/epidemiologia , Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese/etiologia , Idoso , Estações do Ano , Temperatura , Implante Peniano/efeitos adversos , Clima , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
Penile prosthesis surgery is a definitive treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED). The two categories of penile prosthesis are endorsed by professional guidelines, inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) and malleable penile prosthesis (MPP). Each modality of penile prosthesis offers distinct advantages and incorporates specific design features, allowing for personalized device selection that aligns with individual needs and preferences. While the overall complication rate of penile implant surgery remains low, surgeons should maintain a high index of suspicion for complications in the perioperative time period. Multimodal analgesic regimens including nerve blocks and narcotic-free pathways should be administered to manage perioperative pain. Finally, the high patient satisfaction after penile prosthesis surgery underscores the success of this ED treatment option.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Manejo da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória , Implante Peniano , Prótese de Pênis , Humanos , Masculino , Implante Peniano/métodos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Resultado do Tratamento , Satisfação do Paciente , Desenho de PróteseRESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Among the many treatments for erectile dysfunction, implantation of a penile prosthesis has been associated with high patient satisfaction rates. However, patients with coexistent Peyronie's disease (PD) and refractory erectile dysfunction and/or severe deformities may show different results. The aim of our study was to assess and to compare the level of satisfaction, with an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP), in men with/without coexistent PD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A survey study based on a five-item satisfaction questionnaire was submitted to all those live patients implanted in the period 1992-2022 at our center (n=570) and their partners. Ninety-two percent of implants were inflatable devices. Surgeries were mainly performed by two surgeons. The main outcome measure used was the level of patient and partner satisfaction with sexual intercourse after IPP. RESULTS: Of the 570 eligible patients, 479 (84%) completed the survey (393 Non-PD: GROUP 1; 70 non-complex PD-Group 2; 16 complex PD). Eighty-six per cent of patients in Group 1 reported satisfactory sexual intercourse (very or moderately satisfied). Non-complex PD implanted patients (Group 2) reported a global 81% satisfactory sexual intercourse (very or moderately satisfied) (p>0.05). However, when we evaluated the PD subgroup of patients with severe PD who require incision/excision/grafting at the time of implant (Group 3: n=20), only 61% reported satisfactory sexual intercourse (p<0.01) with predominance of moderately satisfied patients over very satisfied: 78% vs. 22%). Additionally, 84% (Group 1), 80% (Group 2) and 54% (Group 3) of partners reported satisfactory intercourses, respectively (p<0.01). Overall, 84% of Group 1 implants and 79% of Group 2 reported that they would undergo the procedure again if the IPP failed (p>0.05; ns). Only 50% of Group 3 patients would do it again. With regard to cosmetic aspects, 48% of the Group 3 implant reported penile shortness or soft glans as the main causes of their dissatisfaction. Only 2.4% of total PP patients expressed difficulty in manipulating the device. CONCLUSION: The presence of PD alone may not impact PP patient and partner satisfaction, but patients with more severe baseline deformity who require incision/grafting may be less satisfied with outcomes including penile length and glans sensation.
Assuntos
Satisfação do Paciente , Implante Peniano , Induração Peniana , Prótese de Pênis , Humanos , Induração Peniana/cirurgia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Parceiros Sexuais , Estudos Retrospectivos , Adulto , Satisfação Pessoal , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgiaRESUMO
Penile prosthesis implantation is a surgical option for erectile dysfunction when other treatments fail or the patient prefers implantation. Although penile prosthesis is generally considered safe and effective, various complications have been reported in the literature. High-flow priapism, resulting from an arteriovenous fistula between the cavernosal artery and the corpora cavernosa, is a rare complication after penile prosthesis implantation. Managing the condition as autoinflation may lead to unfortunate complications. A 54-year-old male patient underwent a penile prosthesis implantation due to erectile dysfunction lasting for 5 years. Doppler ultrasound revealed arterial insufficiency that was refractory to oral and intracavernosal treatments. A 3-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (Coloplast - Titan) was implanted through a midline penoscrotal incision without any complications. The patient reported uncontrolled tumescence after activating the device, which led us to suspect autoinflation. The final diagnosis was high-flow priapism due to an arteriovenous fistula in the cavernosal artery. The patient was given an antiandrogenic medication and the prosthesis was deflated for 3 months. The fistula closed without any additional intervention. High-flow priapism is a rare but potential complication of penile prosthesis implantation. Careful evaluation and management of patients' symptoms are necessary for diagnosing and treating this condition. This case highlights the importance of considering high-flow priapism as a potential cause of uncontrolled tumescence after penile prosthesis implantation and the possibility of successful non-surgical management.
Assuntos
Fístula Arteriovenosa , Disfunção Erétil , Implante Peniano , Prótese de Pênis , Priapismo , Masculino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Priapismo/etiologia , Priapismo/cirurgia , Prótese de Pênis/efeitos adversos , Disfunção Erétil/diagnóstico , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Pênis , Implante Peniano/efeitos adversos , Fístula Arteriovenosa/complicações , Fístula Arteriovenosa/cirurgiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The minimally invasive infrapubic approach (MIIA) for inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement has shown favorable peri-operative safety and efficacy profile, but scarce data exist on long-term follow-up. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the safety and efficacy of IPP implantation via the MIIA after a minimum 5-year follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified data of implanted patients prospectively included in our institutional database. Complications and functional outcomes were assessed by using validated tools. Specifically, quality of life and patient satisfaction were evaluated by the Quality of Life and Sexuality with Penile Prosthesis (QoLSPP) questionnaire. Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze IPP survival (defined as a working IPP). RESULTS: Overall, 67 patients implanted by MIIA with a median (IQR) age of 64 years (61-70) were included. The median (IQR) follow-up duration was 71 months (63-80). Fifteen (22%) patients experienced complications: minor (Clavien ≤2) events included changes in penile sensitivity (n = 1; 1.5%), orgasmic dysfunction (n = 1; 1.5%), pain (n = 5; 7%), urinary tract infection (n = 2; 3%), and chronic discomfort (n = 1; 1.5%); major (Clavien 3) complications were represented by mechanical failure (n = 3; 4.5%), IPP infection (n = 1; 1.5%), and cylinder protrusion (n = 1; 1.5%). The estimated IPP survival was 94% (95% CI, 91.4-96.6), 92.5% (95% CI, 89.7-95.3), and 92.5% (95% CI, 89.7-95.3) at 3, 5, and 7 years after implantation, respectively. In patients using the device at follow-up (n = 61; 91%), median (IQR) scores for QoLSPP domains demonstrated favorable functional outcomes and patient satisfaction: functional 21 (19-23), personal 16 (15-18), relational 14 (12-15), and social 12 (11-14). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This study represents the longest follow-up using validated tools to assess the outcomes of IPP implantation via MIIA so far. IPP placement via MIIA confirms to be safe and to offer high satisfaction to both patients and partners at mid-term evaluation.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Implante Peniano , Prótese de Pênis , Masculino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Implante Peniano/efeitos adversos , Implante Peniano/métodos , Disfunção Erétil/cirurgia , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Qualidade de Vida , Prótese de Pênis/efeitos adversos , Pênis/cirurgia , Satisfação do Paciente , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Plaque excision and grafting (PEG) has been recommended for patients with Peyronie's disease (PD) with >60° curvature and/or hinge effect and strong preoperative erections, while placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) is recommended when rigidity is suboptimal. Nevertheless, many patients counseled to undergo an IPP decline and insist on proceeding with PEG due to personal preference or desire to avoid an implant. AIM: We aim to review long-term outcomes in patients who underwent PEG for PD at our institution and investigate whether there is any difference in long-term outcomes in patients who undergo PEG despite a recommendation to undergo IPP. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review from 2007 to 2021 on PEG surgery performed at a single tertiary care institution in patients ≥18 years old who had >3 months of follow-up. OUTCOMES: Postoperative information was gathered from the electronic medical record, including postoperative erectile function, patient satisfaction, and the ability to engage in penetrative sexual intercourse. RESULTS: An overall 251 patients underwent PEG with a median follow-up of 12 months (IQR, 6-54). Among these, 54 (22%) were initially advised to undergo IPP but elected for PEG. Patients who underwent PEG despite counseling to undergo IPP reported lower postoperative ability to engage in intercourse (51% vs 76%). Seven (13%) patients initially advised to undergo IPP eventually received an IPP, relative to 7 (4%) initially advised to undergo PEG. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Thorough preoperative assessment of erectile function and penile deformity can guide clinician counseling and manage patient expectations during decision making between PEG surgery and IPP implantation for PD. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Limitations of this study include its retrospective nature, high attrition to follow-up, and risk of recall and selection bias. This is a large study with a median follow-up of 12 months, with a high-volume single surgeon who treats patients in a specialized population of complex cases. CONCLUSION: Patients who were initially counseled to undergo IPP due to suboptimal erectile rigidity but elected for PEG had worse postoperative ability to engage in penetrative intercourse, and a higher proportion of these patients eventually received an IPP.
Assuntos
Disfunção Erétil , Implante Peniano , Induração Peniana , Prótese de Pênis , Adolescente , Humanos , Masculino , Aconselhamento , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Satisfação do Paciente , Implante Peniano/métodos , Prótese de Pênis/psicologia , Pênis/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , AdultoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of androgens in penile and urethral health, we sought to understand what impact hypogonadism may have on artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) outcomes. We hypothesize that patients with hypogonadism are at increased risk of reinterventions, complications, and infections. METHODS: We queried the TriNetX Global Database in March 2023 for patients receiving an AUS or IPP, looking at lifetime reintervention, complication, and infection rates. We conducted multiple comparisons: (1) eugonadal patients against hypogonadal patients, (2) hypogonadal patients on testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) against hypogonadal patients not on TRT, and (3) hypogonadal patients on TRT against eugonadal patients. RESULTS: Hypogonadal patients undergoing AUS had more complications (33.5% vs 28.3%), higher reintervention rates (27.7% vs 24.3%) and higher infection rates (7.3% vs 6.8%), albeit none reaching significance. Hypogonadal patients undergoing IPP had significantly higher infection rates (6.3% vs 4.4%, RR 1.5 (1.04, 2.04)) and reintervention rates (14.9% vs 11.9%, RR 1.3 (1.04, 1.61)), but not complication rates (21.9% vs 18.9%). When comparing patients with hypogonadism on TRT vs off TRT, there was not a significant difference in reinterventions, or complications, in AUS and IPP patients, but there were significantly more infections in IPP patients (7.0% vs 3.9%, RR 1.9 (1.002, 3.5)). CONCLUSION: Hypogonadal patients have more reinterventions, complications, and infections following urologic implant surgery, to varying levels of significance. TRT may not be completely protective to improve tissue health but with many limitations that should be explored in further research.