Trends in penile prosthesis implantation and analysis of predictive factors for removal

Penile prosthesis implantation: a bibliometric-based visualization study

The treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) using penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) has recently garnered significant interest, but reports of bibliometric analyses of studies on PPI have yet to appear. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to use visualization techniques to statistically and qualitatively assess the state of knowledge, current research topics, and trends in this field. The Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) was searched for publications about PPI from the inception of the database to 2023. VOSviewer (version 1.6.19), CiteSpace (version 6.2. R2), and Excel (version 2021) were used for the data analysis. The results show a total of 1015 original articles and reviews on PPI published over this nearly 50 years, with an increasing trend in the number of studies published each year. The United States is the country with the most published studies (n = 578). Mayo Clinic is the organization with the most publications overall (n = 46). The Journal of Sexual Medicine has the most publications (n = 184). The most prolific author is Wilson, Steven K (n = 31). The most commonly used terms were erectile dysfunction (n = 509), penile prosthesis (n = 332), implantation (n = 207), satisfaction (n = 201), surgery (n = 200), infection (n = 134), outcomes (n = 128), Peyronie's disease (n = 121), men (n = 115), and experience (n = 109). Current research focuses on four main areas: complications of PPI, the current status of inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP), the use of PPI in radical prostatectomy and Peyronie's disease populations, and patient satisfaction after PPI. Improving patient satisfaction with PPI through improved mechanical design and surgical techniques is a key concern for future research.

A propensity score-matched analysis of intra- and postoperative penile prosthetic complications in the solid organ transplant population

INTRODUCTION

Solid organ transplant (SOT) has an anticipated higher risk of penile prosthesis (PP) complications related to immunosuppression and surgical approach post-SOT. It is still not determined if PP surgery in the SOT population incurs these same higher risks.

OBJECTIVES

To observe differences in intra- and postoperative PP complications between SOT and non-SOT cases from the TriNetX US Collaborative Network, a large real-world database of deidentified patient data from 56 health care organizations within the United States.

METHODS

We used the TriNetX database to perform a propensity score-matched cohort study comparing 10-year outcomes between patients with and without a SOT (kidney, heart, lung, liver, pancreas, and intestine) who underwent a PP procedure. Cohorts were matched on age, race/ethnicity, history of pelvic and abdominal surgery, overweight and obesity status, type 2 diabetes mellitus, atherosclerosis, substance use disorders, socioeconomic difficulties, anticoagulant/antiplatelet medications, and spinal cord injury. Outcomes included intra- and perioperative complications as well as prosthetic complications (mechanical malfunction, fibrosis, displacement, hemorrhage, pain, stenosis, removal with or without replacement, and complex [all postoperative complications]).

RESULTS

There were 233 patients in each group after matching (SOT and non-SOT). The mean ± SD age at the prosthesis procedure was 59.7 ± 9.89 years, and 44% of patients were White (P > .05). There was no significant difference for incidence of intra- and perioperative complications (2.62% vs 2.19%, P = .76). The SOT group did not have a higher 10-year incidence of complex complications (30.58% vs 27.51%, P = .11) or mechanical malfunction (10.35% vs 11.62%, P = .25) when compared with the non-SOT group. No difference was found for other prosthetic-related complications (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

In our analysis, patients with a SOT were not more likely to experience long-term complications related to PP. Surgeons performing PP surgery in the SOT population may consider this procedure a potentially safe and viable option for restoring erectile function.

Outcomes of Inflatable Penile Prosthesis following Radical Cystectomy - A matched Cohort Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes of inflatable-penile-prosthesis (IPP) implantation after radical-cystectomy compared with other etiologies of erectile dysfunction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All inflatable penile prostheses within the past 20 years in a large regional health system were reviewed, and erectile dysfunction etiology was determined as radical-cystectomy, radical-prostatectomy, or organic/other ED. Cohorts were generated by 1:3 propensity score match using age, body mass index, and diabetes status. Baseline demographics and relevant comorbidities were evaluated. Clavien-Dindo complications, grade, and reoperation were assessed. Multivariable logarithmic regression was used to identify the predictors of 90-day complications following IPP implantation. Log-rank analysis was used to assess the time-to-reoperation after IPP implantation in patients with a history of cystectomy compared with non-cystectomy etiologies.

RESULTS

Of 2600 patients, 231 subjects were included in the study. Comparing patients undergoing IPP for cystectomy vs. pooled non-cystectomy indications, those who underwent radical-cystectomy had a higher overall complication rate(24% vs. 9%, p=0.02). Clavien-Dindo complication grades did not differ across groups. Reoperation was significantly more common following cystectomy (cystectomy: 21% vs. non-cystectomy: 7%, p=0.01), however time to reoperation did not differ significantly by indication (cystectomy: 8 years vs non-cystectomy: 10 years, p=0.09). Among cystectomy patients, 85% of reoperations were due to mechanical failure.

CONCLUSION

Compared to other erectile dysfunction etiologies, patients undergoing IPP with a history of cystectomy have an increased risk of complications within 90-days of implantation and need for surgical device revision, but no greater risk for high-grade complications. Overall IPP remains a valid treatment option after cystectomy.

Prevention of Penile Prosthesis Infection

INTRODUCTION

Management protocols for treatment of severe erectile dysfunction have changed little in the last 20 years. Most algorithms consider penile prostheses as the last option of treatment in patients who have failed medical management. Despite multiple advances in current devices, prosthetic infection remains the most feared complication by implanting surgeons and patients. This report tries to make a compilation of the factors that can be impacted to prevent penile implant infections, and to make penile implantation a safer and more reliable way to solve an erection deficit.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

List events related to the surgical act (pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative) that are related to the risk of infection to contextualize possible actions/measures used to avoid prosthetic infection.

RECENT FINDINGS

The impact of coated implants on reduction of infection rates. The recommendation to use chlorhexidine-based solutions over iodine solution for preoperative skin preps. Appears to be no difference in infection rates according to the approach chosen by the surgeon (infrapubic vs penoscrotal). The change in the microbial colonies that are colonizing implants in recent years are dramatic. Lack of evidence of which solutions to use for salvage or revision washout surgery: Chemical eradication or mechanical lavage cleansing?. Despite the importance of metabolic control in the literature, there is a disparity in exact glycemic values ​prior to the intervention in our literature. Factors such as preparation of the operative site, presence of comorbidities or previous surgeries, surgical time, or additional maneuvers during surgery can negatively impact the final result of penile prosthetic surgery.

Penile implant surgery-managing complications

Penile prosthesis surgery represents the end-stage treatment for erectile dysfunction. It is conventionally used only in cases of erectile dysfunction refractory to pharmacological treatments or vacuum constriction devices. Contemporary literature suggests that penile prothesis surgery is associated with a high satisfaction rate and a low complication profile. However, it must be appreciated that the complications of surgery can have devastating consequences on a patient’s quality of life and satisfaction and include infection, prosthesis malfunction, penile corporal perforation and penile length loss. Several factors – such as appropriate patient selection, methodical preoperative assessment and patient optimization, specific intraoperative protocols and postoperative recommendations – can reduce the risk of surgical complications. This narrative review discusses the diagnosis and management of both intraoperative and postoperative complications of penile prosthesis surgery.

Development and Validation of the Satisfaction Survey for Inflatable Penile Implant (SSIPI)

BACKGROUND

No validated English language patient-reported outcome (PRO) currently exists that assesses satisfaction with inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Satisfaction data have been largely based primarily on surgeon assessment of patients or using questionnaires that have not been designed for this purpose.

AIM

To develop an English-language validated PRO that assesses patient satisfaction after IPP surgery.

METHODS

Initially, a literature review and discussions with experts defined domains important to IPP satisfaction (pain, appearance, function, overall satisfaction). The initial 35-item Satisfaction Survey for Inflatable Penile Implant (SSIPI) was developed. Cognitive interviews were then performed with IPP patients (n = 12) to gain feedback on the SSIPI domains and items. These data were used to modify SSIPI with the addition of 2 questions for a final item number of 37. Patients from 4 centers, who were between 6 months and 5 years after IPP, were administered the questionnaire through RedCap. Reliability statistics and content analysis were used to winnow questions to yield the final 16-item version of the SSIPI. Internal consistency was assessed via Cronbach's alpha and item-total correlation. Test-retest reliability was assessed via intraclass correlation coefficients using baseline and 2-week data. For convergent validity, the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction and the Self-Esteem and Relationship (SEAR) questionnaire were used. For discriminant validity, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was used. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess the factor structure of the SSIPI.

OUTCOMES

Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and confirmatory factor analysis were assessed.

RESULTS

118 men were surveyed. Mean age was 66.8 ± 9.5 years. The 16-item SSIPI showed high internal consistency with an overall Cronbach's Alpha of 0.97 (domains 0.85-0.89). Item-total correlations for individual items to subscales ranged from 0.60 to 0.91. The overall test-retest reliability was 0.94 (domains 0.87-0.93). Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction and Self-Esteem and Relationship had correlations of 0.84 overall (domains 0.57-0.79) and 0.47 overall (domains 0.34-0.44), respectively. International Prostate Symptom Score (discriminant validity) had correlations of -0.29 overall (domains -0.17 to -0.31).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

SSIPI is the first English-language validated IPP satisfaction PRO. This will enable clinicians to collect satisfaction data in a standardized way.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

As strengths we have used a rigorous psychometric process and have no industry sponsorship. Limitations include small numbers of specific subpopulations.

CONCLUSION

The SSIPI has demonstrated robust psychometric properties. Salter CA, Bach PV, Jenkins L, et al. Development and Validation of the Satisfaction Survey for Inflatable Penile Implant (SSIPI). J Sex Med 2021;18:1641-1651.

A narrative review of the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia in patients undergoing penile prosthesis surgery

Penile prosthesis surgery is an effective and durable treatment modality for patients who have failed conservative management for erectile dysfunction (ED). Thorough patient counseling and appropriate preoperative workup lay the foundation for a successful outcome. While the risk of infection of penile prosthesis is rare, it is a dreaded complication with dire consequences. The goal of the prosthetic surgeon is to minimize the risk of preventable complications. Given the common prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in this patient population, it is essential that providers are familiar with the implications and nuances of managing both conditions in order to maximize the chances of a favorable result. Due to the relatively infrequent nature of complications associated with the management of BPH in the setting of a penile prosthesis, literature regarding this topic is scarce. In this narrative review we present our own case series illustrating some of the most common scenarios that a prosthetic surgeon may encounter. We have included our suggestions for management in these difficult situations based on our clinical experience. In the following review we have highlighted the importance of identifying and treating BPH in penile implant candidates to reduce postoperative morbidity and to offer critical insights into managing BPH-related complications this population.

Global Trends in Prevalence, Treatments, and Costs of Penile Prosthesis for Erectile Dysfunction in Men

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.

When Titans become weak: penile prosthesis cylinder aneurysm, a case report

During the first 5 years after penile prosthesis implantation, complications such as malfunction requiring revision or replacement occur in only 7% of cases. We present a case of a 62-year-old patient who had a Coloplast Titan^® prosthesis implanted while also undergoing girth enhancement corporoplasty. Shortly after, the patient noticed an increasing bulge on the side of his penis, which prevented total deflation. An aneurysm of the right cylinder was identified during reoperation; cylinders were replaced and the redundant tunica albuginea and septal defect were corrected by plication from inside the corpora cavernosa.

A systematic review of penile prosthesis infection and meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus role

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.

Correlation of fasting blood sugar at the time of penile prosthesis surgery with the level of glycated hemoglobin and the outcome of surgery

Background

The role of glycemic control in predicting implant infection and other surgical complications is debatable. This study aimed to assess the potential correlation between fasting blood sugar (FBS) levels prior to penile prosthesis surgery (PPS) and the surgical outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective study from data collected prospectively in 2015 in a single center. Patients who underwent penile implant procedures were included. Exclusion criteria were if surgery done by low-volume implanter, patients who required revision surgery or not diagnosed with diabetes mellitus. Management was standardized to all patients.

Results

All complications whether minor or major were documented up to three years. One year after the surgery a Likert scale questionnaire was completed by the patients. In total, 218 patients completed the study at last follow-up. Complications rate was 6.25%. The rate of infection requiring explantation was 3.8%. 0.9% of patients had a superficial infection managed successfully with conservative management. 0.9% had erosion and 0.9% had mechanical failure. There was no statistically significant difference in FBS or glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in patients with postoperative complications compared to patients with satisfactory postoperative course. FBS level on the day of surgery was within 20 mg/dL (1.11 mmol/L) of the expected range based on HbA1c measurement in 62 patients (28.44%), while in 146 patients (66.98%) the FBS was not within 20 mg/dl (1.11 mmol/L) of the expected range based on preoperative HbA1c level.

Conclusion

FBS levels on the day of surgery are not correlated with HbA1c levels and PPS outcomes.

Access to penile prostheses differ across provinces in Canada: A survey of Canadian urologists

INTRODUCTION

Surgical implantation of a penile prosthesis is the gold standard treatment for refractory erectile dysfunction. The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of and access to these procedures in Canada.

METHODS

Canadian urologists known to perform penile prostheses procedures were surveyed on areas such as surgical volume, type of device used, and the direct cost to patients for both malleable and inflatable devices.

RESULTS

Of the 50 urologists invited to participate in the study, 34 (68%) completed the online survey. Participants represented nine Canadian provinces and included a mix of academic (65%) and community (35%) urologists. Most participants (79%) performed less than 10 procedures per year. Roughly three-quarters of participants (74%) used inflatable devices in over 90% of cases, while half implanted inflatable devices exclusively. The most common devices implanted were American Medical Systems (AMS). Participants from Alberta, Manitoba, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland reported full coverage for both malleable and inflatable devices. Saskatchewan was the only province where no coverage was reported. The remaining provinces were found to have variable degrees of coverage. Across all centers without full coverage, the median reported cost to patients for a malleable and inflatable device was $5000 and $6000, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The urologists surveyed most commonly perform inflatable penile prostheses procedures. Significant geographical differences exist with respect to reported coverage for these procedures. This study highlights the need for continued advocacy on behalf of the urological community towards the goal of equity in coverage for penile prostheses across Canada.

Updates in penile prosthesis infections

Inflatable penile prostheses are an important tool in the treatment of medically refractory erectile dysfunction. One of the major complications associated with these prostheses is infections, which ultimately require device explanation and placement of a new device. Over the past several decades, significant work has been done to reduce infection rates and optimize treatment strategies to reduce patient morbidity. This article reviews the current state of knowledge surrounding penile prosthesis infections, with attention to the evidence for methods to prevent infection and best practices for device reimplantation.

A Survey of Usage of Penile Prosthesis

BACKGROUND

Implantation of an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) has high success and satisfaction rates, but there remains a paucity of evidence examining non-usage of IPP and reasons for discontinuation.

AIM

To identify how frequent patients use their prosthesis and their personal reasons for no longer using it.

METHODS

We conducted a survey of all patients who underwent an IPP implantation by a single surgeon over a 6-year period, between 2012 and 2018. After application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 114 patients formed the final cohort. Patients were initially surveyed via mail with a questionnaire; those who did not respond were surveyed via telephone. The factors determining patient selection for IPP implantation included suitability for general anesthesia, manual dexterity to use the device by the patient or their partner on a demonstration device, and presence of refractory erectile dysfunction, HbA1C lower than 8.5, or need for a revision of a previously placed IPP. Universally, a 3-piece AMS 700 Series implant was placed via the penoscrotal approach. Data were analyzed with Pearson chi square test, and survivability of the device was assessed with Kaplan-Meier survival curve.

OUTCOMES

The main outcomes of this study are the frequency of IPP usage and reasons for discontinuation.

RESULTS

The survey participation rate was 97%. The mean age of patient was 64 years (range 34-83 years), and the mean time between surgery and completion of survey was 2.98 years (range 0.25-7.4 years). Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated that 68% of the patients were using the IPP at 5 years after implantation. Using the age 70 years as a cutoff, 18 (22%) patients younger than 70 years and 14 (42%) patients older than 70 years discontinued using the IPP (P = .029). The commonest reasons for discontinuation were poor health to engage in sexual activity (2.6%), loss of companion (19%), loss of interest in sex (2.6%), and device malfunction with no further interest in revision of prosthesis (14%).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The clinical implication of this study was improved patient selection for device implantation.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

To our knowledge, no other study has investigated reasons for patients no longer using their prosthesis. Our study has several limitations including that it is a cross-sectional analysis, our survey is not validated, this is a single-surgeon experience, we have a small sample size, and we did not differentiate between virgin implant and reimplantation.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows a high rate (28%) of non-usage of IPP, more so in men older than the age of 70 years in the first 5 years of implantation. Knoll P, Rai S, Talluri S, et al. A Survey of Usage of Penile Prosthesis. J Sex Med 2020;17:2287-2290.

Penile implant infection prevention part 1: what is fact and what is fiction? Wilson's Workshop #9

Inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) infections are undeniably devastating for patient and surgeon alike. While less common in this modern era, the landscape of prosthesis infection is shifting. Continued examination of risk factors for infection and re-evaluation of common practices remain critical should we aim to advance the field. Quality research on this topic is limited by several factors, among which small sample size and lack of coordinated effort pose the most precarious of challenges. Nonetheless, careful analysis of available data in conjuncture with judicious utilization of established research from other prosthetic fields can help us better grasp the issue at hand. In this review, we aim to do exactly that-to examine available evidence in an effort to discern fact from fiction. In this first part of the three part series, we aim to summarize our understanding of the pathogenesis behind prosthesis infections, explore known preoperative risk factors, and discuss intraoperative considerations for infection prevention. In the second part of this series, we will examine the game changing effect of infection retardant implant coatings. Part three of the series details postoperative prevention strategies, reviews salvage techniques, and discusses additional key considerations.

Neurogenic bladder is an independent risk factor for complications associated with inflatable penile prosthesis implantation

Men with neurogenic bladder (NGB) often have concomitant erectile dysfunction and may be considered for inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement. However, it is unclear if NGB is a risk factor for complications associated with IPP placement. The aim of this study is to compare surgical outcomes after IPP placement in a contemporary cohort of patients with NGB to that of a non-neurogenic control group. To accomplish this, consecutive records of patients who underwent IPP implantation between 2007 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with a known neurologic lesion and documented NGB by clinical or urodynamic criteria were compared with a non-neurogenic control group of men with erectile dysfunction. We found that patients in the NGB cohort were younger (median age 48 vs. 62 years, p < 0.001) and less likely to void spontaneously prior to surgery (3% vs. 97%, p < 0.001). The most common cause for NGB was spinal cord injury (46%). There was a 24.3% overall rate of complication (infection, erosion, or mechanical failure) in the NGB cohort compared with a 7.5% rate in the non-neurogenic control group (p = 0.001). On multivariate logistic regression modeling, NGB (OR 3.47; 95% CI 1.13-10.71; p = 0.03) was independently associated with risk of IPP complication. First time penile prosthesis was associated with lower risk of IPP complication (OR 0.25 95% CI 0.09-0.71; p = 0.01). In conclusion, patients with NGB are at increased risk for complications after IPP placement. Patients should be counseled accordingly, and all efforts should be made to stabilize bladder function prior to surgery.

Infection Prevention Considerations for Complex Penile Prosthesis Recipients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to critically analyze and summarize recent studies in the area of penile prosthesis surgery outcomes with a focus on infection prevention in high-risk patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Reduction of surgical time in complex prosthesis surgery may reduce infection risk. Concomitant implant surgery is not associated with increased infection risk. Certain immunocompromised patients may be more likely to have penile implant infections, but these may not include patients with well-controlled HIV, well-controlled diabetes, or transplant recipients. Substance abuse is correlated with increased risk of infection after penile implant surgery. Careful patient selection and preoperative optimization can reduce infection risk in spinal cord injury patients. In the last 5 years, there have been several important studies investigating the risk of penile prosthesis infection in complex patients, clarifying which patient categories are at increased risk and how that risk can be mitigated.