A prospective evaluation of penile measures and glans penis sensory changes after penile prosthetic surgery

Complications and troubleshooting in primary penile prosthetic surgery-a review

Penile implant surgery is the gold standard to treat erectile dysfunction with success rates of over 90%. The first penile implants were developed in the early 1900s. Since then, several types of implants have been developed including malleable implants, two-piece inflatable implants, and three-piece inflatable implants. The three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis, which was introduced in 1973, is the most widely used type of penile implant in the United States. Penile implant surgery has undergone numerous advancements over the years, improving outcomes and patient satisfaction. However, as with any surgical procedure, there are risks and complications associated with penile implant surgery. It is important for surgeons to understand these potential complications and to have strategies in place to manage and prevent them to achieve the best possible outcomes for their patients.

Electrophysiological evaluation of alterations in penile sensation due to penile prosthesis implantation in patients with erectile dysfunction

Objective

The present study was aimed to determine the effect of penile prosthesis implantation (PPI) surgery on penile sensation by evaluating the penile electromyography (EMG) variables.

Methods

The research was designed as a prospective study. Thirty patients who were diagnosed with organic erectile dysfunction and had underwent PPI surgery between January 2017 and January 2018 in the Urology Clinic of Antalya Training and Research Hospital were included in this study. Penile sensory EMG was performed on each patient 1 day prior to the surgery by the Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation clinic. Additionally, the control EMG study was also performed in the 3rd and 6th postoperative months.

Results

We included 27 patients in this study who attended regular follow-ups and had complete EMG results. Out of the 27 patients, 23 (85.2%) patients had received malleable (ProMedon) penile prosthesis, one (3.7%) patient had received a two-piece inflatable (Ambicor) penile prosthesis, and three (11.1%) patients had received a three-piece inflatable (AMS 700 CXR) penile prosthesis. The mean nerve conduction value (NCV) of the patients was 29.85 (standard derivation: 22.54; range: 0-78.4) m/s during the preoperative period, whereas it was 27.64 (standard derivation: 24.72; range: 0-83.3) m/s in the 3rd postoperative month and 24.80 (standard derivation: 22.31; range: 0-88.4) m/s in the 6th postoperative month. There was no significant difference between preoperative NCV and 3rd postoperative month NCV (p=0.607). Similarly, no significant difference was observed between preoperative NCV and 6th postoperative month NCV (p=0.276). Additionally, the change between NCV values at postoperative 3rd and 6th months was not statistically significant (p=0.553).

Conclusion

Significant loss of penile sensation does not occur in patients who undergo PPI surgery.

A Review on Penile Length and Girth Issues in Penile Prosthetic Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this paper is to understand the reasons behind penile length and girth issues after penile prosthesis surgery and review the literature for current strategies employed to decrease these issues.

RECENT FINDINGS

Measurement inconsistencies triggering further studies have shown there is a real loss of penile length and girth after prosthesis surgery. There have been varying hypotheses of why this happens, and numerous approaches have been proposed to help combat this in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings. Erectile dysfunction prevalence is expected to increase; therefore it is important for urologists to understand the treatment options, including prosthesis surgery. Numerous techniques have been hypothesized and studied in smaller settings in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings with regard to prosthetics surgery. However, larger studies are still needed to confirm these findings in order to help to counsel and educate patients preoperatively in addition to employing tactics to help minimize penile shortening.

Nuances of infrapubic incision for inflatable penile prosthesis

This workshop completes the trilogy of nuances of the various incisions used to place an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Infrapubic placement was the original technique employed 50 years ago for the very first IPP surgeries. The historical perspective of the development of implantation incisions and the original Scott prosthesis highlighted in this work should be fascinating to today's younger prosthetic urologists. The developing surgeon should also find some surprising maneuvers considered important technique nuances from the highest volume infrapubic implanter in the world. Among the wonders of the infrapubic approach covered are: The surgery is conducted without the aid of an in-dwelling Foley catheter or post-operative inflation. Hydrodistension of the corpora substitutes for corporal dilatation. The "chicken choke" protects the urethra from damage. Closed suction drainage is employed despite minimal scrotal dissection. Motivated patients may use their new device as early as 14 days after implantation.

Clinical Recommendations From the European Society for Sexual Medicine Exploring Partner Expectations, Satisfaction in Male and Phalloplasty Cohorts, the Impact of Penile Length, Girth and Implant Type, Reservoir Placement, and the Influence of Comorbidities and Social Circumstances

INTRODUCTION

To date, several aspects of inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) surgical procedure have been poorly studied.

AIM

The aim of this study was to review the evidence associated with IPP implantation and provide clinical recommendations on behalf of the European Society for Sexual Medicine (ESSM). Overall, 130 peer-reviewed studies and systematic reviews, which were published from 2007-2018 in the English language, were included.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and open-label prospective and retrospective studies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The panel provided statements exploring patients and partner expectations, satisfaction in male and phalloplasty cohorts, the impact of penile length, girth and implant type, reservoir placement, the influence of comorbidities, and social circumstances. Levels of evidence were provided according to the Oxford 2011 criteria and graded as for the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine recommendations.

RESULTS

In the preoperative setting, it is fundamental to identify and interact with difficult patients with the intention of enhancing the surgeon's ability to establish the surgeon-patient relationship, reduce physical and legal risk, as well as enhancing patient satisfaction. To address this need, the mnemonic Compulsive, Unrealistic, Revision, Surgeon Shopping, Entitled, Denial, and Psychiatric ("CURSED") has been suggested to identify patients who are at high risk of dissatisfaction. The current recommendations suggest improving glycemic control in patients with diabetes. Available evidence suggests evaluating transplant recipients with the criteria of Barry, consisting of stable graft function for >6 months, avoidance of intra-abdominal reservoir placement, and low-dose immunosuppression. HIV status does not represent a contraindication for surgery. Smoking, peripheral vascular disease, and hypertension may be associated with an increased risk of revision surgery. Patients with spinal cord injury may receive IPP. Patients aged ≥70 years, as well as obese patients, can be offered IPP. The IPP implantation can be performed in patients with stable Peyronie's disease. Ectopic high submuscular reservoir placement can be considered as an alternative method.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

There is a relevant lack of high-level data and definite conclusions in certain areas remain difficult to draw.

STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS

All studies have been evaluated by a panel of experts providing recommendations for clinical practice. Because of lack of sufficient prospective data, some of the included studies are retrospective and this could be stated as a limitation.

CONCLUSION

This ESSM position statement provides recommendations on optimization of patient outcome by patient selection, and individualized peri- and intra-operative management. ESSM encourages centers to collaborate and to create prospective, multicenter registries in order to address this topic of increasing importance. Osmonov D, Christopher AN, Blecher GA, et al. Clinical Recommendations from the European Society for Sexual Medicine Exploring Partner Expectations, Satisfaction in Male and Phalloplasty Cohorts, the Impact of Penile Length, Girth and Implant Type, Reservoir Placement, and the Influence of Comorbidities and Social Circumstances. J Sex Med 2020;17:210-237.

Penile dimensions: What are surgeons measuring?

Penile dimensions and related dissatisfaction, may have significant impact upon patients whom undergo andrological surgeries. Whilst penile dimension assessment is performed as part of the andrological evaluation, little is known regarding the surgeons' opinions nor contemporary practices. This study was designed to gain further insights into the opinions and practices of clinicians regarding penile measurement and is the first paper in the literature of its kind. The study was performed by inviting clinicians at andrological/urological conferences to participate in a voluntary 10 point survey concerning penile dimensions. Of 126 responses recorded, 56% (71/126) were andrologists. Of the responders, 45% (56/122) did not routinely perform penile measurement prior to treatment nor were they aware of the standardised method (93/123). The majority 64%(81/126) would measure the penile length from the pubic bone to the tip (79/123) with the penis in a stretched position (99/125). A goniometer was the most common way of assessing penile curvature (37/73) and the length would be measured mostly on the convex side (46/119). Responders felt that, from the patients perspective, a combination of length, girth and shape (51/123), or length only (50/123), were the more important aspects of penile dimensions. As responders were recruited based on their interest in andrological aspects of urology, it may not be representative of the general urological community. In conclusion, attitudes and methods of penile measurement are quite varied amongst surgeons, thus further discussion and investigation of this aspect of andrological care ought to occur.