-
Sexual Medicine Reviews Apr 2018Priapism is defined as a full or partial erection lasting longer than 4 hours after sexual stimulation and orgasm or unrelated to sexual stimulation. The main goal of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Priapism is defined as a full or partial erection lasting longer than 4 hours after sexual stimulation and orgasm or unrelated to sexual stimulation. The main goal of priapism management is to resolve the episode immediately to preserve erectile function and penile length. Corporal smooth muscle necrosis is likely to have already occurred, and medically refractory erectile dysfunction is expected in patients with a protracted episode. Penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) in the early or late phase of priapism can restore erectile function.
AIM
To review the literature on PPI in priapism.
METHODS
A PubMed search of all English-language articles published before 2017 was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement using the following search terms: penile prosthesis implantation, priapism, and corporal fibrosis. All publications reporting on PPI during or after priapism episodes were included for review.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Three types of priapism were reviewed for management using PPI. Surgical techniques, outcomes, and patient satisfaction were reported.
RESULTS
Early implantation (during the episode) is technically easier and has lower complication rates compared with delayed (electively, after the erectile dysfunction is observed) surgery. Immediate PPI also allows preservation of penile length, which is related to higher satisfaction rates.
CONCLUSIONS
The paradigm is shifting toward immediate PPI in the management of ischemic priapism. Patients with non-ischemic priapism or recurrent priapism, even without a major ischemic episode, are at high risk for erectile dysfunction and are candidates for PPI. Yücel ÖB, Pazır Y, Kadıoğlu A. Penile Prosthesis Implantation in Priapism. Sex Med Rev 2018;6:310-318.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Erectile Dysfunction; Fibrosis; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Penile Implantation; Penile Prosthesis; Priapism; Young Adult
PubMed: 28916463
DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.08.002 -
Actas Urologicas Espanolas 2023Penile prosthesis (PP) implantation is an effective option for erectile dysfunction. Although initially PP surgery was carried out in an inpatient setting, there is a...
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE
Penile prosthesis (PP) implantation is an effective option for erectile dysfunction. Although initially PP surgery was carried out in an inpatient setting, there is a growing trend to implant PP as a major ambulatory surgery (MAS). This study aimed to perform a systematic review of the literature to identify available evidence of the implantation of PP under MAS setting and go carry out a comparison between MAS and inpatient procedures.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and MEDES electronic databases and non-indexed supplements for scientific congresses were searched to identify articles related to the surgical implantation of PP in MAS up to February 2021. Key search terms included penile prosthesis, erectile dysfunction, ambulatory surgery, ambulatory care, and surgery.
RESULTS
Among 171 publications retrieved (51 PubMed, 73 EMBASE, 3 Cochrane, 2 using MEDES and 42 manual searching), 5 studies were finally selected. There were no significant differences between MAS or inpatient setting in terms of the type of device, surgical approach, or location of reservoir. Complication rates observed in both groups were similar. Implantation of PP in MAS was less expensive than inpatient surgery and was associated with acceptable patient satisfaction rates and adequate pain control.
CONCLUSIONS
Studies demonstrated that outpatient PP surgery can achieve similar outcomes in terms of safety and satisfaction to implantation of PP in the inpatient setting, while it could reduce costs and improve the efficiency. This research could support decision makers to extend PP surgery into the ambulatory setting.
Topics: Humans; Male; Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; Erectile Dysfunction; Penile Implantation; Penile Prosthesis; Penis
PubMed: 36319559
DOI: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2022.08.019 -
Sexual Medicine Reviews Oct 2021There is an increased prevalence of erectile dysfunction in patients with solid organ transplant (SOT) compared with the general population. Many of these patients may... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
There is an increased prevalence of erectile dysfunction in patients with solid organ transplant (SOT) compared with the general population. Many of these patients may become refractory to medical treatment of erectile dysfunction and penile prosthesis (PP) is often recommended. Concerns regarding the safety of PP in patients with SOT are due to their immunosuppressed state.
OBJECTIVE
We aim to review all current literature on the outcomes of patients with SOT who have received PP.
METHODS
A PubMed search was performed to identify articles pertaining to the outcomes of PP in patients with SOT.
RESULTS
We identified and included 14 studies that report on outcomes of PP placement in 143 patients with SOT and 191 non-SOT controls from interval period from 1979 to 2019. Studies included retrospective cohort studies, case series, and case reports. Compared with non-SOT controls who had PP, aggregate analysis demonstrated that patients with SOT who had PP did not develop significantly increased overall complications. However, they were significantly more likely to experience future surgical complications.
CONCLUSION
Our aggregate analysis demonstrated that patients with SOT are not at a significantly increased risk of overall complications when receiving a PP. Nevertheless, there is an increased risk of experiencing PP injury during subsequent surgeries, which may be mitigated by the earlier involvement of a urologist. Given the lack of recent data, large studies are prerequisite to further evaluate the safety and overall outcome of PP surgery in patients with SOT. Dick B, Greenberg JW, Polchert M, et al. A Systematic Review of Penile Prosthesis Surgery in Organ Transplant Recipients. Sex Med Rev 2021;9:636-640.
Topics: Humans; Male; Organ Transplantation; Penile Implantation; Penile Prosthesis; Penis; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 32641224
DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2020.05.006 -
Asian Journal of Andrology 2020With the onset of a metabolic syndrome epidemic and the increasing life expectancy, erectile dysfunction (ED) has become a more common condition. As incidence and...
With the onset of a metabolic syndrome epidemic and the increasing life expectancy, erectile dysfunction (ED) has become a more common condition. As incidence and prevalence increase, the medical field is focused on providing more appropriate therapies. It is common knowledge that ED is a chronic condition that is also associated with a myriad of other disorders. Conditions such as aging, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, obesity, prostatic hypertrophy, and prostate cancer, among others, have a direct implication on the onset and progression of ED. Characterization and recognition of risk factors may help clinicians recognize and properly treat patients suffering from ED. One of the most reliable treatments for ED is penile prosthetic surgery. Since the introduction of the penile prosthesis (PP) in the early seventies, this surgical procedure has improved the lives of thousands of men, with reliable and satisfactory results. The aim of this review article is to characterize the epidemiology of men undergoing penile prosthetic surgery, with a discussion about the most common conditions involved in the development of ED, and that ultimately drive patients into electing to undergo PP placement.
Topics: Diabetes Complications; Diabetes Mellitus; Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Hypertension; Impotence, Vasculogenic; Male; Pelvic Bones; Penile Implantation; Penile Induration; Penile Prosthesis; Penis; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Radiation Injuries; Radiotherapy; Reoperation; Spinal Cord Injuries; Vascular Diseases; Wounds and Injuries
PubMed: 31793443
DOI: 10.4103/aja.aja_124_19 -
Current Urology Reports Feb 2023Despite the current surgical advances and patients' satisfactions after penile prosthesis (PP) implantation, there has been paucity of data on reported partner... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Despite the current surgical advances and patients' satisfactions after penile prosthesis (PP) implantation, there has been paucity of data on reported partner satisfaction and their quality-of-life (QoL). Our objective was to summarize the current literature on partner satisfaction for both heterosexual and non-heterosexual populations, respectively. We specifically conducted a systematic review according to the Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards, and stratified studies into three tiers by methodological rigor.
RECENT FINDINGS
After an initial search of 172 articles, 33 studies met the inclusion criteria for the final review: 30 for heterosexual partner satisfaction, and 3 for LGBTQ patient satisfaction were included due to lack of published literature on partner satisfaction for LGBTQ patients. For heterosexual partner satisfaction, 10 studies were classified as Tier 1, 11 studies were classified as Tier 2, and 9 studies were classified as Tier 3. From an initial search of 13 records, three studies consisting of 272 patients met the inclusion criteria for our LGBTQ review. Across all the tiers, studies noted satisfaction rates between 50 and 90% and improved satisfaction and sexual QoL metrics compared to pre-surgery rates. That said, partner satisfaction rates were also consistently lower than patient satisfaction rates. Although the range of evidence quality varies, the available literature suggests significant improvements in and relatively high rates of partner satisfaction after PP implantation. Given the diversity of study designs and widespread use of non-validated or non-specific questionnaires in the current literature, future research should focus on prospective studies and/or data collection using validated, PP-specific questionnaires.
Topics: Male; Humans; Penile Prosthesis; Erectile Dysfunction; Quality of Life; Prospective Studies; Penile Implantation; Patient Satisfaction; Personal Satisfaction; Sexual and Gender Minorities
PubMed: 36670232
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-022-01126-5 -
Progres En Urologie : Journal de... Jun 2015In the absence of practice recommendations, it was realized a review of the literature to establish the epidemiological and bacteriological data, prevention of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
In the absence of practice recommendations, it was realized a review of the literature to establish the epidemiological and bacteriological data, prevention of infection, therapeutic attitude according to the clinical situation as well as the future prospects about the infections of penile prostheses.
METHODS
A systematic review of the scientific literature was realized by the base of Pubmed data (http://www.ncbi.nim.gov/pubmed/). The literature search was made between 1992 and 2014 using the keywords: penile prostheses, penile implant, infection. The article was developed according to the recommendations Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses 2009 (Prisma).
RESULTS
The analysis of 10 meta-analysis and series published in various expert centers allowed us to synthesize the care recommended at present. Coagulasse négative staphylococcus were germs most frequently persons in charge but variations are secondarily observed in the current practices. The physiopathological knowledge (biofilm and risk factors) allowed to develop the antibiotic antibioprophylaxis, the precautionary measures of the infection of the operating site, the design of prostheses antimicrobial-impregnated or antibiotic-dipped and meticulous surgical technique ("Wash-Out", "No Touch"). In case of real infection, it was recommended in the absence of contra-indication to realize immediate salvage procedure allowing to set up a new penile prostheses, so avoiding the penile fibrosis.
CONCLUSION
All these measures have induced a decrease of the infection of penile implants significantly as well in case of primary implantation as of surgical revision. The future perspectives aim at preventing the infection by inhibition of the formation of the biofilm and by a more effective action of antibiotics about germs which it contains; or to use devices intrapenile "spacer" when the immediate salvage procedure is not feasible to facilitate the next implantation.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Male; Penile Prosthesis; Prosthesis-Related Infections
PubMed: 25841759
DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2015.02.006 -
Surgical Infections Feb 2016Controversy still exists in some centers on whether diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for penile prosthesis infection. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Controversy still exists in some centers on whether diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for penile prosthesis infection. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence correlating penile implant infections to the presence of diabetes mellitus in patients with organic erectile dysfunction.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review searching through Medline database from 1960 to 2014, using keywords; penile prosthesis(es), penile implant(s), and diabetes mellitus. We used the Prisma 2009 Flow diagram for systematic reviews. Thirty-eight publications were selected for inclusion in this qualitative analysis.
RESULTS
Most case series reporting a greater infection rate in patients with diabetes mellitus date from the 1970s to 1990s. These series reported an infection rate of 5.5 to 20% and contained small cohort of patients. In the 1990s larger case series reported a lower infection rate in patients with diabetes mellitus compared with patients with paraplegia, pelvic trauma, and patients on steroids, but still reported an infection rate as high as 10.6%. With the implementation of antibiotic coated implants in 2001, infection rates reduced further with reported rates becoming less than 2% in patients with diabetes mellitus. The latest and largest case series by Eid et al. (2012) reported an infection rate of 0.46% with antibiotic coated implants and "no touch" technique in a cohort of 1511 cases, out of which 41% were patients with diabetes mellitus.
CONCLUSION
Strong evidence exists that the risk of penile prosthesis infection has reduced over the decades with device improvement and surgical expertise. In larger case series infection rates in patients with diabetes mellitus is not statistically significant from that experiences in the population at large.
Topics: Diabetes Complications; Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Penile Prosthesis; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 26426099
DOI: 10.1089/sur.2015.164 -
International Journal of Impotence... Jan 2020Penile fracture is a rare condition that describes the rupture of the corpus cavernosum following direct, high-pressure trauma to the erect penis. There is no... (Review)
Review
Penile fracture is a rare condition that describes the rupture of the corpus cavernosum following direct, high-pressure trauma to the erect penis. There is no standardized management algorithm for these patients. We performed a systematic review of the past 10 years regarding management of penile fractures. A complete PRISMA-P 2015 checklist was performed where we reviewed English articles published over the past 10 years to identify 105 articles, where 63 articles were of relevance and subsequently narrowed to a total of 28 articles into the final review for this study. We determined that immediate penile exploration and tunica repair is considered the most common and current management of penile fractures with experts demonstrating that it leads to the fastest in recovery in erectile function and positive cosmetic outcomes. However, we also determined that the specific algorithm can be variable-down to the suture material, use of catheterization, urethroplasty when involved, and length of recovery/follow-up. In the last several decades, men with penile fracture have been treated, in most cases, with immediate surgical intervention. This review highlights the varying practices regarding surgical exploration, injury repair, and postoperative management in men with a penile fracture. Immediate penile exploration and tunica repair have been the mainstay approach of management.
Topics: Catheterization; Humans; Male; Penile Erection; Penile Prosthesis; Penis; Postoperative Care; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Rupture; Suture Techniques
PubMed: 31685943
DOI: 10.1038/s41443-019-0212-1 -
Translational Andrology and Urology Apr 2024Penile prosthetic devices are the standard treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) after failure of maximum medical therapy and conservative options. Several penile... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Penile prosthetic devices are the standard treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) after failure of maximum medical therapy and conservative options. Several penile lengthening procedures (PLPs) can be performed concurrently with penile prosthesis (PP) insertion in patients with severe ED, penile shortening, and/or Peyronie's disease to help combat negative emotional and psychological concerns from penile length loss with penile prosthetic device placement.
METHODS
An extensive, systematic literature review of the various pre-, intra-, and post-operative techniques that can be applied to preserve, restore or enhance penile length at the time of penile prosthetic implantation.
RESULTS
Numerous pre-operative and post-operative inflation protocols exists with vacuum erection devices and penile traction therapy. Intraoperative surgical techniques include cavernosal sparing and channeling without dilatation, subcoronal incision with circumferential penile degloving and grafting, the sliding technique, the modified sliding technique, the multiple-slit technique, the tunical expansion procedure (TEP), modified TEP, and the auxetic expansion procedure. These approaches can be meaningful to restore and/or preserve length for patients undergoing PP insertion.
CONCLUSIONS
PLPs can be performed by surgeons who have extensive penile reconstruction experience and have been trained to do these procedures, as there is significant risk to the patient and limitations to what can be expected. Each patient must be counseled in detail about the risks and benefits of these procedures and have their expectations managed as the average postoperative penile length recovery is around 3 cm and can range from 0-4.0 cm. Future research is needed to identify the appropriate candidate for each approach, and how much length gain the patient can expect.
PubMed: 38721300
DOI: 10.21037/tau-23-354 -
Minerva Urology and Nephrology Dec 2023Inflatable penile prosthesis are the definitive treatment for erectile dysfunction. The two most used surgical approaches to position the implants are the penoscrotal... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Inflatable penile prosthesis are the definitive treatment for erectile dysfunction. The two most used surgical approaches to position the implants are the penoscrotal and the infrapubic. Current trends showed that the penoscrotal approach is extensively preferred however, there is not conclusive evidence demonstrating the superiority of one technique over the other. The aim of this review is to summarize the scientific evidence available and to underline strengths and weaknesses of the two techniques.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and National Center for Biotechnology Information PubMed to identify relevant published articles. The included studies had to explicitly examine the use of three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis with a focus on the surgical access method and complications.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Twenty-six articles were included in the review: seven narrative reviews, five retrospective observational studies, five prospective observational studies, and nine mixed methodology studies. The most frequent approach was the penoscrotal, which was also found more comfortable (RG1) by the operators in one study. The infrapubic approach lasts less and one study demonstrated higher satisfaction by the patients.
CONCLUSIONS
There is no evidence of significant differences in complications among the penoscrotal and infrapubic approaches. While the infrapubic approach is faster and patients were more satisfied, the penoscrotal approach is the most used by far. This is likely related to the more straightforward procedure through this access and the excellent surgical field exposure. For these reasons, it is also preferred in the most complex cases.
Topics: Humans; Male; Observational Studies as Topic; Patient Satisfaction; Penile Implantation; Penile Prosthesis; Penis; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 38126284
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6051.23.05475-7