-
Sexual Medicine Reviews Jul 2022Penile prosthesis (PP) implantation combined with grafting techniques is indicated in patients with Peyronie's disease (PD) and erectile dysfunction (ED) nonresponsive... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Penile prosthesis (PP) implantation combined with grafting techniques is indicated in patients with Peyronie's disease (PD) and erectile dysfunction (ED) nonresponsive to medical and conservative treatment that present with residual penile curvature greater than 30°, severe penile deformity or significant penile shortening.
OBJECTIVES
To address the preoperative evaluation, the surgical procedure and the functional outcomes of grafting techniques combined with PP implantation in patients with PD and concomitant ED and to provide future perspectives on the matter.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature based on the PRISMA statement (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021224517). Records were identified by searching Medline, Scopus, The Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases as well as sources of gray literature from inception to December 2020. The quality of all included records was assessed based on a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies.
RESULTS
A total of 935 patients with a mean age of 59.6 ± 9.2 years from 23 studies were included in this systematic review. All studies reported excellent short- and long-term postoperative results, as well as high satisfaction rates ranging from 80 to 100%. A mean increase of 2.7 ± 1.4 cm in penile length was observed. Among different grafting materials and different types of PP, no significant differences in terms of preoperative, perioperative and postoperative functional outcomes or complications were demonstrated. Still, the operative time was shorter in studies applying the collagen fleece TachoSil.
CONCLUSIONS
PP implantation combined with grafting is a safe and highly effective surgical procedure in patients with PD and concomitant ED. All grafting materials provide similar beneficial outcomes, but TachoSil subsequently reduces the operative time and does not require suturing. Still, no definite conclusions can be drawn regarding the superiority of one grafting technique over the other, as randomized clinical trials are lacking. Sokolakis I, Pyrgidis N, Ziegelmann M, et al. Penile Prosthesis Implantation Combined With Grafting Techniques in Patients With Peyronie's Disease and Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review. Sex Med Rev 2022;10:444-452.
Topics: Aged; Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Satisfaction; Penile Implantation; Penile Induration; Penile Prosthesis
PubMed: 34219005
DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2021.03.007 -
Urology Aug 2022The purpose of this study was to determine long-term survival of inflatable penile prosthesis (PP) and identify potential factors that may influence device survival. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The purpose of this study was to determine long-term survival of inflatable penile prosthesis (PP) and identify potential factors that may influence device survival. We performed a systematic review of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies of men treated with inflatable PP with at least 5 years of device survival data. We performed a random effects meta-analysis to estimate device survival at 1, 3, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years of follow-up. The robustness of the meta-analysis results was evaluated in a 1-study removed sensitivity analysis and sources of heterogeneity among studies were investigated with subgroup analysis. In 12 studies (20,161 patients; median age 57 years), PP device survival was 93.3% at 1 year, 91.0% at 3 years, 87.2% at 5 years, 76.8% at 10 years, 63.7% at 15 years, and 52.9% at 20 years. The results of the meta-analysis were not significantly influenced by single study effects in a 1-study removed sensitivity analysis. In a subgroup analysis, 5-year device survival rates were 90.6% vs 82.1% (P = .01) comparing newer vs older studies; no other patient or study design characteristic was statistically associated with device survival rates. In conclusion, the median device survival time of an inflatable PP is approximately 20 years. The factors responsible for improved device survival in newer studies remain unclear and warrant further study.
Topics: Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Penile Implantation; Penile Prosthesis; Prosthesis Design; Prosthesis Failure; Survival Rate
PubMed: 35421510
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2022.03.026 -
Therapeutic Advances in Urology 2023The leakage of urine during sexual arousal, known as climacturia, is an under-recognized clinical condition often overshadowed by erectile dysfunction in men who have... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The leakage of urine during sexual arousal, known as climacturia, is an under-recognized clinical condition often overshadowed by erectile dysfunction in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy.
OBJECTIVES
This study aims to determine and evaluate the role of the Mini-Jupette technique and its alternatives in the treatment of climacturia.
DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
We conducted a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for systematic reviews. We searched Medline PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases until October 2022.
RESULTS
We included seven studies involving 120 patients with climacturia. Different types of grafts were used, ranging from synthetic mesh to autologous grafts. In all seven studies, the use of the Adrianne Mini-Jupette (AMJ) and its alternatives showed a high percentage of improvement in climacturia, with reported complete resolution ranging from 65% to 93%. Regarding postoperative complications, one study reported the highest sling explantation rate at 11% (4/38), while other studies reported complications ranging from subjective symptoms such as dysuria and perineal pain to the need for subsequent artificial urinary sphincter placement.
CONCLUSION
The AMJ sling and its variations are low-cost, time-efficient, and relatively safe procedures with high patient satisfaction rates among those treated for climacturia.
PubMed: 38090352
DOI: 10.1177/17562872231215180 -
Actas Urologicas Espanolas Jun 2020Penile prosthesis surgery is currently the most effective treatment for erectile dysfunction when medical treatment is ineffective or contraindicated. Among the surgical...
CONTEXT
Penile prosthesis surgery is currently the most effective treatment for erectile dysfunction when medical treatment is ineffective or contraindicated. Among the surgical approaches described in the literature, the scrotal, infrapubic and subcoronal are the most common in the daily clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES
The main objectives were to describe the infrapubic surgical technique evaluating its indications and complications, as well as comparing its advantages and disadvantages with the penoscrotal approach.
ACQUISITION AND SYNTHESIS OF THE EVIDENCE
A literature review from 1983 until current date was carried out in Medline (PubMed and Cochrane Library databases) following PRISMA standards. Sixteen studies were included: 4 prospective, 4 retrospective, one systematic review, one randomized trial, one original article, 5 expert opinion/surgical technique descriptive paper.
DISCUSSION
According to the literature reviewed, although the penoscrotal approach is the most applied, the infrapubic approach showed a shorter operative time and a tendency for an earlier recovery of sexual activity after surgery. Complications are rare, having similar rates to the penoscrotal approach; no cases of glans hypoesthesia have been reported and peri-prosthetic infection rates were less than 3%. Satisfaction rates of infrapubic penile prosthesis were higher than 80%.
CONCLUSIONS
Penile prosthesis implantation requires of a profound knowledge of the different surgical approaches in order to best adapt each technique based on each individualized case. The infrapubic approach, even if it is not the most used, is as feasible and reliable as the penoscrotal approach. The infrapubic approach is effective and safe, with high level of both, patients and partners' satisfaction.
Topics: Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Penile Implantation; Pubic Bone
PubMed: 32115278
DOI: 10.1016/j.acuro.2019.10.010 -
European Urology Focus May 2022Penile prosthesis is a durable and effective treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED). Even as other treatment options for ED have been brought to market, penile... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Penile prosthesis is a durable and effective treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED). Even as other treatment options for ED have been brought to market, penile prosthetic surgery remains a mainstay for urologists treating ED. No systematic study has yet summarized the global trends in penile prosthetic surgery.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review studies of trends in penile prosthetic surgery to determine global movements in implantation rates, malleable versus inflatable prosthetic surgery, inpatient versus outpatient implantation surgery, proportion of men with ED undergoing penile prosthetic surgery, and prosthetic cost.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed for studies assessing trends in penile prosthetic surgeries and costs associated with penile prosthetic device and inclusive surgical costs.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Twenty-seven studies were identified during the systematic review, comprising 447,204 penile prosthetic surgeries reported from 1988 to 2019. A trend analysis demonstrates that rates of penile prosthetic surgery declined dramatically in the late 1980s and early 1990s, but have demonstrated modest growth since the mid-2000s. Outpatient inflatable penile prosthetic surgery has strongly trended upward. Costs of penile prosthetic device have matched the rate of inflation, but inclusive surgical cost has radically outpaced inflation. Growth has mainly been seen in the USA, with a more modest global growth.
CONCLUSIONS
Penile prosthesis remains a viable option for the treatment of ED. Trends such as outpatient surgery and inflatable penile prosthesis placement may be driving the recent steady growth of penile prosthetic surgeries, but surging inclusive surgical cost may present a barrier for some patients without insurance coverage.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Penile prostheses continue to be an important treatment for erectile dysfunction. While the volume of penile prosthetic surgeries dropped when phosphidiesterase-5 inhibitors became available, prosthetic surgery is becoming more patient centric, as seen by increases in inflatable prosthetic placement and outpatient surgery.
Topics: Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Penile Implantation; Penile Prosthesis; Penis; Prevalence
PubMed: 34034995
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.05.003 -
Sexual Medicine Reviews Jun 2024In cases of a noninfected malfunctioning inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) device, surgeons often opt to exchange all of the device rather than the defective component... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
A systematic review comparing different approaches for inflatable penile prosthesis revision: partial-component exchange, complete-component exchange, or reservoir "drain and retain".
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.
Topics: Humans; Penile Prosthesis; Male; Reoperation; Prosthesis Failure; Penile Implantation; Device Removal
PubMed: 38798020
DOI: 10.1093/sxmrev/qeae035 -
Sexual Medicine Reviews Apr 2020Erectile dysfunction is a common problem that may be definitively treated with the implantation of an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). The preponderance of available...
INTRODUCTION
Erectile dysfunction is a common problem that may be definitively treated with the implantation of an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). The preponderance of available data on IPP surgery derives from institutional studies, most notably from academic centers or large single-surgeon series, where the majority of procedures are performed in a hospital setting. Because insurance companies and health systems look to reduce health care costs, IPP surgery in outpatient freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASC) is becoming more prevalent.
AIM
To review the utility of surgery in an ASC setting and to explore its role in the modern practice of urology, focusing on IPP implantation.
METHODS
A critical review was performed of the literature on ambulatory surgery, with specific focus on IPP surgery, using the PubMed database. Key search terms and phrases included erectile dysfunction, penile prosthesis, ambulatory surgery, ambulatory surgery center, outpatient surgery.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE
The main outcome measure was the use of IPP implantation in an ASC.
RESULTS
In contemporary surgical practice, the implementation of ambulatory surgery in free-standing centers is increasing. The principal benefits include reducing cost and improving efficiency. Studies on the modern use of IPPs support the prospect of implantation in an ambulatory setting, which can achieve similar outcomes to surgeries classically performed in the inpatient hospital setting. Novel approaches to anesthesia, surgical, and nursing care have revolutionized IPP surgery so that it can now be safely and effectively performed in the ambulatory setting.
CONCLUSION
The role of ambulatory IPP implantation has increased, with the majority of cases being performed outside the hospital. Although there will always be a need for hospital-based surgery, such as significant medical comorbidities, more studies demonstrating the safety and feasibility of ambulatory surgery are needed. For those men who would otherwise be candidates for ambulatory surgery but whose insurance mandates hospital-based treatment, such studies proving utility, safety, and reduced cost could inspire policy change and broaden the ambulatory practice of IPP surgery. Segal RL, Siegelbaum MH, Lerner BD, et al. Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Implantation in the Ambulatory Setting: A Systematic Review. Sex Med Rev 2020;8:338-347.
Topics: Ambulatory Care; Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Penile Implantation
PubMed: 31562047
DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2019.07.006 -
Sexual Medicine Reviews Apr 2016The most common cause of urinary incontinence in men after radical prostatectomy is intrinsic sphincter deficiency, which can affect long-term quality of life. The... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The most common cause of urinary incontinence in men after radical prostatectomy is intrinsic sphincter deficiency, which can affect long-term quality of life. The prevalence of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after radical prostatectomy has been reported to be 2.5% to 90%. For patients with moderate to severe male SUI, the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is considered the gold standard in surgical treatment.
AIM
To review the available literature on the development, patient selection, surgical technique, complications, and management of AUS for male SUI.
METHODS
A literature review was performed through PubMed from 1947 to 2015 regarding AUS for male SUI.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
To assess various surgical techniques related to AUS insertion, outcomes, and complications and to offer recommendations regarding management of complications.
RESULTS
The AUS can be placed through a perineal or trans-scrotal incision, particularly in the setting of dual insertion of an AUS and an inflatable penile prosthesis. The most commonly used cuff is 4.0 cm. The efficacy of InhibiZone is debatable. Pressure-regulating balloons can be filled with saline or contrast material and can be placed in an orthotopic or an ectopic location. In a systematic review of the literature, dry or improved continence rates are achieved in 79% of patients, with 90% reporting satisfaction and improved quality-of-life index scores after surgery. The most common AUS complications include a nonfunctioning device, sub-cuff atrophy, erosion, and infection. These complications are managed by strategies such as cuff downsizing, tandem cuff placement, and explantation. Dual AUS and inflatable penile prosthesis insertion is feasible for patients with SUI and erectile dysfunction.
CONCLUSION
The AUS is a durable and effective device for the management of SUI. Surgeons should be versed in the different device components, their potential complications, and their management.
Topics: Humans; Male; Patient Satisfaction; Prostatectomy; Quality of Life; Urinary Incontinence, Stress; Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
PubMed: 27872025
DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2015.11.004 -
Minerva Urology and Nephrology Apr 2024Quality of Life and Sexuality with Penile Prosthesis (QoLSPP) is the first validated questionnaire to specifically evaluate the satisfaction of patients undergoing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Quality of Life and Sexuality with Penile Prosthesis (QoLSPP) is the first validated questionnaire to specifically evaluate the satisfaction of patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation. Our primary aim was to conduct a systematic review and pooled analysis of articles reporting QoLSPP.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A comprehensive bibliographic search on the MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases was performed in April 2023. Studies were selected if they assessed male subjects (P) undergoing penile prosthesis implantation (I) with or without comparison with other treatments (C), reporting the patient satisfaction according to QoLSPP (O). Prospective and retrospective original studies were included (S). The risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool and the Knoll method. Means and standard deviations (SDs) of QoLSPP scores were included in the pooled analysis. PROSPERO ID: "CRD42023427261."
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 10 studies investigating 1105 patients were included in the systematic review; of these, eight articles describing the outcomes of 693 subjects were eligible for the pooled analysis. Overall serious risk of bias was found in 2/3 of nonrandomized comparative studies (66%), while seven single-arm studies (100%) were classified as having a high risk of bias. Pooled analysis of the QoLSPP-Functional domain revealed an overall effect size (ES) of 4.22 points (95% CI 4.04-4.40; P<0.001). The QoLSPP-Relational pooled score was 4.17 points (95% CI 4.03-4.31; P<0.001). The QoLSPP-Social pooled score corresponded to 4.21 points (95% CI 4.02-4.40; P<0.001). Pooled analysis of the QoLSPP-Personal domain showed an overall ES of 3.97 points (95% CI 3.61-4.32; P<0.001). There was insufficient data to pool QoLSPP total scores.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation report positive scores in all QoLSPP domains, demonstrating high satisfaction levels. Future studies are needed to improve the evidence on the topic.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Male; Penile Prosthesis; Patient Satisfaction; Sexuality; Penile Implantation
PubMed: 37795696
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6051.23.05466-6 -
Therapeutic Advances in Urology 2023Devices such as inflatable penile prostheses (IPP) can be used to achieve erectile rigidity after phalloplasty in assigned female at birth (AFAB) individuals. The... (Review)
Review
Insertion of inflatable penile prosthesis in the neophallus of assigned female at birth individuals: a systematic review of surgical techniques, complications and outcomes.
Devices such as inflatable penile prostheses (IPP) can be used to achieve erectile rigidity after phalloplasty in assigned female at birth (AFAB) individuals. The approach to inserting an IPP in a neophallus is different and more challenging compared to that of an anatomical penis due to the absence of anatomical structures such as the corpora cavernosa, and the more tenuous blood supply of the neophallus and reconstructed urethra. In addition, the ideal surgical techniques and devices for use in the neophallus have not been defined. This review systematically summarises the literature on the insertion of IPP in the neophallus of individuals AFAB. In particular, the described techniques, types of devices used and peri-operative and patient-reported outcomes are emphasised. An initial search of the PubMed database was performed on 16 September 2022 and an updated search was performed on 26 May 2023. Overall, 185 articles were screened for eligibility and 15 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Two studies reported outcomes on the zephyr surgical implant 475 FTM device and the others reported outcomes on the Boston Scientific AMS 600/700 CX 3-piece inflatable, AMS Ambicor 2-piece inflatable, Coloplast Titan or Dynaflex devices. Overall, 1106 IPPs were analysed. The infection rate was 4.2%-50%, with most studies reporting an infection rate of <30%. Mechanical failure or dysfunction occurred in 1.4%-36.4%, explantation was required in 3.3%-41.6%, and implant revision or replacement was performed in 6%-70%. Overall, 51.4%-90.6% of patients were satisfied and 77%-100% were engaging in sexual intercourse. An IPP in a neophallus is an acceptable option to achieve rigidity for sexual intercourse. However, this challenging procedure has good reports of patient and partner satisfaction despite significant risks of complications.
PubMed: 37719136
DOI: 10.1177/17562872231199584