Patient and Partner Outcome of Inflatable and Semi-rigid Penile Prosthesis in a Single Institution

Overview

Journal Int Braz J Urol

Specialty Urology

Date 2015 Jul 23

PMID 26200547

Citations 17

Authors

Ibrahim Halil Bozkurt

Burak Arslan

Tarik Yonguc

Zafer Kozacioglu

Tansu Degirmenci

Bulent Gunlusoy

Suleyman Minareci

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Penile prostheses are subject to a continuous development and have gained better mechanical reliability and safety during the last decades. In this study, we aimed to investigate the outcomes and satisfaction rates of inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) and semirigid penile prosthesis (SPP) implantation.

Materials And Methods: From August 2001 to June 2012, 257 men with erectile dysfunction (ED) underwent penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) at our institution. Of the 257 patients, 118 underwent implantation of IPP and 139 underwent SPP implantation. The pre-operative and post-operative erectile status of the patients were assessed by international index of erectile function (IIEF) questionnaire. The satisfaction of patients and partners were evaluated by a telephone interview using the erectile dysfunction inventory of treatment satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire and EDITS partner survey.

Results: The overall major complication rate was higher in IPP group. PPI led to a significant improvement in IIEF scores in both groups. For IPP and SPP groups the average EDITS scores were 78±11and 57±8, respectively, and that for the partners were 72±10 and 49±7, respectively (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Although the IPP implantation have better satisfaction rates, the SPP implantation is still a viable treatment option in the surgical treatment of ED because of low cost and high durability with acceptable satisfaction rates.

Citing Articles

Cavernous tissue preservation technique versus conventional technique during penile prosthesis implantation: a prospective comparative study.

Alhefnawy M, Deif H, Wahsh A, Ahmed M, El-Taher A, Morsy G World J Urol. 2025; 43(1):138.

PMID: 39994043 PMC: 11850506. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-025-05476-w.

Penile prosthesis implantation: a bibliometric-based visualization study.

Li Y, Gao D, Zhang J, Wang M, Lan X, Yu X Int J Impot Res. 2024; 37(1):4-13.

PMID: 38851852 DOI: 10.1038/s41443-024-00927-1.

Early Inflatable penile prosthesis implantation offers superior outcomes compared to delayed insertion following ischemic priapism: a narrative review.

Abou Chawareb E, Hammad M, Barham D, Lumbiganon S, Azad B, Osmonov D Int J Impot Res. 2024; 37(1):27-32.

PMID: 38720138 PMC: 11706771. DOI: 10.1038/s41443-024-00900-y.

Recent technological development of penile prosthesis: a literature review.

Patel J, Zakkar B, Polchert M, Tannenbaum J, Dick B, Raheem O Transl Androl Urol. 2024; 13(1):165-184.

PMID: 38404551 PMC: 10891389. DOI: 10.21037/tau-22-741.

Current devices, outcomes, and pain management considerations in penile implant surgery: an updated review of the literature.

Ancha N, Eldin M, Woodle T, Gereta S, Hariprasad K, Butler I Asian J Androl. 2024; 26(4):335-343.

PMID: 38376174 PMC: 11280207. DOI: 10.4103/aja202386.

References

Furlow W . Inflatable penile prosthesis: Mayo Clinic experience with 175 patients. Urology. 1979; 13(2):166-71. DOI: 10.1016/0090-4295(79)90289-9. View

Scott F, BRADLEY W, Timm G . Management of erectile impotence. Use of implantable inflatable prosthesis. Urology. 1973; 2(1):80-2. DOI: 10.1016/0090-4295(73)90224-0. View

Montague D . Experience with semirigid rod and inflatable penile prostheses. J Urol. 1983; 129(5):967-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)52489-1. View

Wilson S, Delk J, Salem E, Cleves M . Long-term survival of inflatable penile prostheses: single surgical group experience with 2,384 first-time implants spanning two decades. J Sex Med. 2007; 4(4 Pt 1):1074-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00540.x. View

Fathy A, Shamloul R, AbdelRahim A, Zeidan A, El-Dakhly R, Ghanem H . Experience with Tube (Promedon) malleable penile implant. Urol Int. 2007; 79(3):244-7. DOI: 10.1159/000107957. View

Collins K, HACKLER R . Complications of penile prostheses in the spinal cord injury population. J Urol. 1988; 140(5):984-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)41905-7. View

Cumming J, Pryor J . Treatment of organic impotence. Br J Urol. 1991; 67(6):640-3. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.1991.tb15231.x. View

Mulcahy J . Current approach to the treatment of penile implant infections. Ther Adv Urol. 2011; 2(2):69-75. PMC: 3126071. DOI: 10.1177/1756287210370330. View

Brinkman M, Henry G, Wilson S, Delk 2nd J, Denny G, Young M . A survey of patients with inflatable penile prostheses for satisfaction. J Urol. 2005; 174(1):253-7. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000161608.21337.8d. View

10.

Sadeghi-Nejad H . Penile prosthesis surgery: a review of prosthetic devices and associated complications. J Sex Med. 2007; 4(2):296-309. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00434.x. View

11.

Menard J, Tremeaux J, Faix A, Pierrevelcin J, Staerman F . Erectile function and sexual satisfaction before and after penile prosthesis implantation in radical prostatectomy patients: a comparison with patients with vasculogenic erectile dysfunction. J Sex Med. 2011; 8(12):3479-86. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02466.x. View

12.

Salama N . Satisfaction with the malleable penile prosthesis among couples from the Middle East--is it different from that reported elsewhere?. Int J Impot Res. 2004; 16(2):175-80. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3901150. View

13.

Lynch M, Scott G, Inglis J, Pryor J . Reducing the loss of implants following penile prosthetic surgery. Br J Urol. 1994; 73(4):423-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.1994.tb07608.x. View

14.

Althof S, Corty E, Levine S, Levine F, Burnett A, McVary K . EDITS: development of questionnaires for evaluating satisfaction with treatments for erectile dysfunction. Urology. 1999; 53(4):793-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00582-2. View

15.

Bettocchi C, Ditonno P, Palumbo F, Lucarelli G, Garaffa G, Giammusso B . Penile prosthesis: what should we do about complications?. Adv Urol. 2008; :573560. PMC: 2581729. DOI: 10.1155/2008/573560. View

16.

Hellstrom W, Montague D, Moncada I, Carson C, Minhas S, Faria G . Implants, mechanical devices, and vascular surgery for erectile dysfunction. J Sex Med. 2010; 7(1 Pt 2):501-23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01626.x. View

17.

Trost L, McCaslin R, Linder B, Hellstrom W . Long-term outcomes of penile prostheses for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013; 10(3):353-66. DOI: 10.1586/erd.12.92. View

18.

Falcone M, Rolle L, Ceruti C, Timpano M, Sedigh O, Preto M . Prospective analysis of the surgical outcomes and patients' satisfaction rate after the AMS Spectra penile prosthesis implantation. Urology. 2013; 82(2):373-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.04.027. View

19.

Rosen R, Riley A, Wagner G, Osterloh I, Kirkpatrick J, Mishra A . The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology. 1997; 49(6):822-30. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(97)00238-0. View

20.

Chung E, VAN C, Wilson I, Cartmill R . Penile prosthesis implantation for the treatment for male erectile dysfunction: clinical outcomes and lessons learnt after 955 procedures. World J Urol. 2012; 31(3):591-5. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-012-0859-4. View