-
Translational Andrology and Urology Apr 2024Priapism is a rare condition characterized by persistent erection of the penis that lasts more than 4 hours in the absence of sexual stimulation and is associated with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Priapism is a rare condition characterized by persistent erection of the penis that lasts more than 4 hours in the absence of sexual stimulation and is associated with significant morbidity and complications, including erectile dysfunction and penile fibrosis. Surgical management of priapism can be extremely challenging. We herein provide a comprehensive review that aims to evaluate the role of penile prosthesis (PP) implantation in the management of priapism.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus to identify studies that evaluated the effectiveness of PP implantation in treating priapism and the long-term complications, outcomes, and patients' satisfaction rate.
RESULTS
Out of 717 English-language studies published between 2002 and 2022, 17 were chosen for this review. Majority of patients had a malleable PP (MPP) implant, either early or delayed after the priapism episode. Early placement (EP) of PP is widely defined between studies ranging from less than 72 hours, within 1 week, and within 3 weeks. Most common causes of priapism were sickle cell anemia (SCA), medication-induced, and idiopathic. Studies show a higher satisfaction rate ranging between 80% and 100%, with sexual intercourse achievement ranging between 64.2% and 100%. Based on the GRADE system, included studies rated as very low quality of evidence. Commonly reported complications that arise after PP procedures, include device infection, erosion, curvature, and mechanical malfunction, such as auto-inflation.
CONCLUSIONS
PP can be an effective treatment option for priapism, particularly in cases of ischemic priapism lasting more than 36 hours or recurrent priapism that is medically refractory. However, due to the very low quality of evidence, larger, well-designed studies are warranted where long-term outcomes, patients' satisfaction, and complications following priapism-related PP implantation are measured as endpoints.
PubMed: 38721288
DOI: 10.21037/tau-23-224 -
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 -
Sexual Medicine Reviews Oct 2021The most common cause of patient dissatisfaction after penile prosthesis placement is penile shortening compared with one's memory of a natural erection. Surgical... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The most common cause of patient dissatisfaction after penile prosthesis placement is penile shortening compared with one's memory of a natural erection. Surgical techniques as well as preoperative and postoperative protocols have been reported to preserve and possibly enhance penile length in someone undergoing penile prosthesis surgery.
OBJECTIVES
This article presents a description of as well as the authors' experience with presurgical protocols, intraoperative techniques, and postsurgical protocols that allow for preservation or enhancement of penile length for patients who undergo inflatable penile prosthesis insertion.
METHODS
An extensive, systematic literature review was performed using PubMed searching for key terms including penile lengthening, inflatablepenile prosthesis, penile girth, buried penis, and penile enhancement. All articles with subjective and/or objective penile length outcomes were reviewed.
RESULTS
Several preoperative treatment protocols were found for penile length preservation and enhancement, which included use of a vacuum erection device as well as traction therapy. Intraoperative techniques included cavernosal sparing, channeling without dilatation, circumferential penile degloving, ventral phalloplasty, suprapubic lipectomy, liposuction, suspensory ligament release, sliding technique, modified sliding technique, multislice technique, and aggressive implant sizing. Postoperative protocols included early device inflation and cycling. Table 1 summarizes and compares the various preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative strategies identified during literature review with their corresponding reported length gain.
CONCLUSIONS
Many preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative surgical techniques can be performed by high-volume implanters to improve one's perceived or true penile length. In the hands of experienced, high-volume implanters, these techniques can be very meaningful for patients undergoing penile prosthesis insertion, particularly those who are concerned with penile length. Shah B, Kent M, Valenzuela R. Advanced Penile Length Restoration Techniques to Optimize Penile Prosthesis Placement Outcomes. Sex Med Rev 2021;9:641-649.
Topics: Humans; Male; Penile Erection; Penile Implantation; Penile Prosthesis; Penis; Sex Reassignment Surgery
PubMed: 32653404
DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2020.05.007 -
Urologia Internationalis 2020Penile prosthesis implant is a safe and effective option in erectile dysfunction patients, being implant procedures safe with a low risk of infection. However, when...
INTRODUCTION
Penile prosthesis implant is a safe and effective option in erectile dysfunction patients, being implant procedures safe with a low risk of infection. However, when infection occurs, it represents a concrete problem for both surgeon and patient.
METHODS
This is a comprehensive review of all issues relating to prosthesis infection, including causes and risk factors, methods of prevention, and management. We analyzed all preoperative and perioperative factors, which can play a role in infection of the device.
RESULTS
Infection of penile prosthesis implant is hard to manage and correct. While the incidence of infection following first implant is up to 3%, in cases of re-implant surgery, the rate can reach as high as 18%. Many articles were found addressing prevention and treatment of penile prosthesis infection, and many analyzed all relevant pre- and perioperative factors associated with penile prosthesis implant. Although such factors have been well studied, there is no clear consensus worldwide on certain topics.
CONCLUSIONS
Penile prosthesis implant is a safe and effective option. Despite infection is a rare event, surgeons should follow strictly pre-, intra- and postoperative recommendations in order to reduce the risk of device's infection. An appropriate antibiotic therapy should be tailored on patient's characteristics and pathogens isolated.
Topics: Humans; Male; Penile Prosthesis; Prosthesis-Related Infections
PubMed: 32541156
DOI: 10.1159/000508472 -
BMC Urology Mar 2021Infection is the most feared complication of a penile prosthesis. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is widely known to increase the risk of several infections, but its role in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Infection is the most feared complication of a penile prosthesis. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is widely known to increase the risk of several infections, but its role in the penile prosthesis is still controversial. This systematic review aims to show the contemporary scenario of penile prosthesis infection and present a meta-analysis about DM contribution to penile prosthesis infection.
METHODS
The review was performed with no language or time limitation, including ten databases. The included articles were about the male population who received a penile prosthesis with no model restriction, with a minimum follow up of 1 year, and outcomes adequately reported.
RESULTS
The mean infection incidence of penile prosthesis ranged from 0.33 to 11.4%. In early 2000, the general incidence of infection was 3 to 5%, then, the introduction of coated materials decreased it to 0.3 to 2.7%. The meta-analysis showed that diabetes mellitus is related to an increased risk of penile prosthesis infection with an odds ratio of 1.53 (95% CI 1.15-2.04).
CONCLUSIONS
Penile prosthesis infection decreased in the last decades but remains a significant cause of reoperation, and it is related to lower prosthesis survival. Meta-analysis concludes that diabetes mellitus is related to a higher risk of penile prosthesis infection.
Topics: Diabetes Complications; Humans; Male; Penile Prosthesis; Prosthesis-Related Infections
PubMed: 33691670
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-020-00730-2 -
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 -
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 -
Urologia Internationalis 2022The aim of this study is to review the literature on the use of antifungal prophylaxis in penile prosthesis (PP) surgery and provide a summary on its efficacy as an...
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to review the literature on the use of antifungal prophylaxis in penile prosthesis (PP) surgery and provide a summary on its efficacy as an adjunct to current prophylactic regimes in patients undergoing PP surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched up to May 2020. All included studies were analysed and the information extracted included author, title of study, year of publication, type of study, journal of publication, and main findings regarding post PP implantation fungal infections.
RESULTS
Nine relevant studies were included in this review, comprising retrospective single-centre studies and retrospective multicentre studies ranging from 2017 to 2020. Fungal infections were found responsible for 11.1% of all PP infections, with a greater risk in patients with diabetes, obesity, and from warmer climates. Current American Urological Association (AUA) and European Association of Urology (EAU) prophylaxis guidelines do not incorporate the use of antifungals. Trials of antifungal prophylaxis regimes combined with antibiotic prophylaxis have demonstrated a reduction in PP fungal infections.
CONCLUSIONS
Fungal infections represent a significant proportion of implant infections and therefore antifungal prophylaxis is warranted. Future studies comparing the efficacy of traditional antibiotic prophylaxis as set out by AUA/EAU with novel prophylaxis regimes including the addition of an antifungal may provide more definitive guidance on this issue. Until then antifungal prophylaxis in all patients undergoing PP procedures may provide a significant cost-effect benefit.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Humans; Male; Mycoses; Penile Diseases; Penile Prosthesis; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35235938
DOI: 10.1159/000522173