-
Archivio Italiano Di Urologia,... Jun 2024Erectile dysfunction can cause self-withdrawal and decreased quality of life. Patients who do not respond to pharmacological therapy and other conservative treatments... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
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.
Topics: Humans; Male; Erectile Dysfunction; Penile Prosthesis; Patient Satisfaction; Prosthesis Design; Penile Implantation; Treatment Outcome; Quality of Life; Prosthesis Failure
PubMed: 38934528
DOI: 10.4081/aiua.2024.12353 -
Minerva Urology and Nephrology Apr 2021Penile prosthesis implantation (PPI), performed with or without adjunct straightening techniques, is one of the available surgical options in cases of Peyronie's disease...
INTRODUCTION
Penile prosthesis implantation (PPI), performed with or without adjunct straightening techniques, is one of the available surgical options in cases of Peyronie's disease (PD) with concomitant erectile dysfunction (ED). The aim of the study was to systematically identify and evaluate evidence regarding IPP in patients with PD and ED.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Using Cochrane's methodological recommendations on systematic reviews, we conducted a systematic review of the literature on clinical research regarding the use of PPI, alone or in combination with any straightening maneuvers in the treatment of patients with PD and ED. The search was carried until January 2020. We included studies in English language with primary population patients with PD and ED who underwent IPP with the intent to treat the PD. All studies that were not original clinical research articles, reported insufficient data or included fewer than 5 patients were excluded from the final analysis.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
In total 43 clinical articles with more than 2000 patients (N.=2143) investigating the effects of penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) for the treatment of PD with or without ED were included in the study. Depending on the severity of the penile curvature, additional penile deformities (i.e. hourglass deformity), penile length, prior operations and surgeons experience, 6 main categories of surgical techniques of PPI for penile straightening and treatment of PD were identified: PPI only, PPI with modelling of the penis, PPI with plication of the penis on the convex side of the curvature, PPI with plaque incision(s), PPI with plaque incision/excision plus grafting and PPI with grafting and penile lengthening.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, patients with PD and ED can expect excellent outcomes with PPI against a minimal risk of side effects. No definite conclusions can be made regarding which technique is superior.
Topics: Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Penile Implantation; Penile Induration; Penile Prosthesis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33179867
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6051.20.03890-4 -
Cureus Nov 2020There are only two three-piece inflatable penile prostheses (IPP) available to patients in the American market: the AMS (American Medical Systems) 700 series (Boston... (Review)
Review
There are only two three-piece inflatable penile prostheses (IPP) available to patients in the American market: the AMS (American Medical Systems) 700 series (Boston Scientific, Massachusetts) and the Coloplast Titan® series (Coloplast, Minnesota), and data comparing the two are scant. The aim of our study was to summarize the current scientific evidence comparing the two. A systematic literature review was conducted on PubMed. A 10-year filter was placed to include only studies published after Coloplast launched the Titan Touch® release pump. Eligibility criteria included articles discussing specifically the AMS 700 and Coloplast Titan® models. Further searches for studies on patient/partner satisfaction were conducted. Abstracts were reviewed to include studies focusing specifically on the models we are studying and studies on patient satisfaction using the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire. The Coloplast device demonstrated slightly greater resistance to the stimulated forces of penetration and gravity. Coloplast implants coated with vancomycin/gentamicin had the highest infection rate followed by the AMS penile prosthesis and the rifampin/gentamicin coating had the lowest infection rate. Prosthesis durability and survival were similar between both brands. Overall satisfaction was high but comparisons are inconsistent. The literature is inconclusive about which device is superior. We suggest randomized, multicenter, prospective studies to help further elucidate the highlights of each product.
PubMed: 33304685
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.11350 -
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 -
Therapeutic Advances in Urology 2024Penile shortening, frequently resulting from end-stage Peyronie's disease (PD), has a negative impact on patients' sexual activity and overall quality of life,... (Review)
Review
Risk and benefits of penile length preservation techniques during penile prosthesis implantation: a systematic review by the young academic urologists sexual and reproductive health working group.
BACKGROUND
Penile shortening, frequently resulting from end-stage Peyronie's disease (PD), has a negative impact on patients' sexual activity and overall quality of life, especially when accompanied by Erectile dysfunction (ED). Various surgical techniques have been described to manage concomitant ED and penile shortening through penile prosthesis (PP) implantation.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and risks of different penile length preservation techniques during PP implantation.
DESIGN
A systematic review of the available literature on the use of penile length preservation maneuvers in conjunction with PP implantation was conducted.
DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
For this systematic review, three databases (Medline, Embase and Cochrane) and clinical trial.gov were queried for relevant publications from 1 January 1990 to 1 September 2022. The review process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.
RESULTS
The qualitative analysis included 15 relevant articles involving 1186 adult patients who underwent penile length preservation techniques during PP implantation. Penile lengthening of 1-7 cm was reported. Overall, postoperative complications were described in up to 21.7% of cases. Only five studies reported functional outcomes, showing a significant improvement in postoperative period based on the administered questionnaire (e.g. IIEF - International Index of Erectile Function, EDITS - Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction).
CONCLUSION
Penile length preservation procedures appear to offer a viable option for managing acquired penile shortening, particularly in cases of PD. However, they are associated with a significant risk of complications. Proper patient selection, thorough discussion of risks and benefits, and referral to high-volume centers are mandatory to achieve optimal outcomes and minimizing complications.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO database registration CRD42022360758.
PubMed: 38205393
DOI: 10.1177/17562872231215177 -
Andrology Nov 2020For a large proportion of patients with spinal cord injury, sexuality and reproduction are important issues. However, sparse data exist regarding available treatment...
BACKGROUND
For a large proportion of patients with spinal cord injury, sexuality and reproduction are important issues. However, sparse data exist regarding available treatment options for this patient population.
OBJECTIVES
We sought to review performance and safety rates of all currently available treatment options for erectile dysfunction in spinal cord injury men.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature review without time restrictions was performed using PubMed/EMBASE database for English-, Italian-, German-, and Spanish-language articles. Articles' selection was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Relevant papers on erectile dysfunction in spinal cord injury patients were included in the final analyses.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Overall, 47 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. Of these, most evidence dealt with phosphodiesterase 5-inhibitors and intracavernous drug injection. Both treatment options are associated with high levels of performance and with patients/partners' satisfaction; side effects are acceptable. Overall, penile prostheses and vacuum erection devices are in general less approved by spinal cord injury patients and are correlated with increased rates of complications in comparison with phosphodiesterase 5-inhibitors and intracavernous drug injection. Sacral neuromodulation, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and intraurethral suppositories have been poorly studied, but preliminary studies did not show convincing results.
CONCLUSION
The best treatment options for erectile dysfunction in spinal cord injury patients emerged to be phosphodiesterase 5-inhibitors and intracavernous drug injection. The choice of erectile dysfunction treatment should be based on several aspects, including residual erectile function, spinal cord injury location, and patients' comorbidities. Future studies assessing the applicability of less well-studied treatments, as well as evaluating innovative options, are needed in this specific population.
Topics: Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Injections; Male; Patient Satisfaction; Penile Erection; Penile Prosthesis; Phosphodiesterase 5 Inhibitors; Prosthesis Implantation; Recovery of Function; Spinal Cord Injuries; Treatment Outcome; Vacuum; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 32741129
DOI: 10.1111/andr.12878 -
Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica = the... Oct 2020We aimed to summarize evidences about the efficacy of available treatments for erectile disfunction after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).
INTRODUCTION
We aimed to summarize evidences about the efficacy of available treatments for erectile disfunction after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic literature review searching on PubMed (Medline), Scopus, and Web of Science databases was performed in December 2019. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Population consisted of patients with erectile disfunction after RARP (P), conservative and surgical intervention were considered of interest (I). No comparator was considered mandatory (C). Outcomes of interest were the recovery of erectile function after conservative treatments and sexual function after surgical treatments (O).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Eleven studies were included. Seven studies focused on the use of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5i) alone (five studies) or associated with other treatments (two studies). All the studies confirmed the efficacy of PDE5i, while the most promising association is with vacuum pump erectile devices. Two studies investigated topical treatments, namely low intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy and alprostadil. Low intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy may be a promising option in patients in whom nerve-sparing surgery was performed. The use of alprostadil could be an effective alternative to intracorporeal injection in those who underwent non-nerve-sparing surgery. One study focused and confirmed the efficacy of penile implants. Furthermore, one study reported the efficacy of a multi-modal treatment with preoperative medication, showing the benefits of a multimodal approach.
CONCLUSIONS
Penile rehabilitation with PDE5i is effective after nerve sparing RARP. The association of PDE5i with vacuum devices could led to a faster recovery. A multimodal approach with preoperative specific care seems to be effective to fasten erectile function recovery.
Topics: Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Penile Prosthesis; Phosphodiesterase 5 Inhibitors; Postoperative Complications; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 32748616
DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03780-7