أعضاء هيئة التدريس - جامعة بنها
Malleable Penile Implant Rod Diameter Predicts Complications and Patient Satisfaction
sexual medicine • 2022
معلومات البحث
المؤلفون
OSAMA ABDELWAHAB ET AL
الكلمات المفتاحية
Malleable Penile Implants; Malleable Rod Diameter; Satisfaction; Erectile Dysfunction,Mlliable penile implant
المجلة العلمية
sexual medicine
الناشر
Elsevier Inc.
المجلد
Copyright © 2022, International Society of Sexual Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esxm.2021.100486
العدد
ED
الصفحات
Copyright © 2022, International Society of Sexual Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esxm.2021.100486
publication.type
International
رابط البحث
Not Available
المواد المرفقة
Not Available
الملخص
Background: One of the most common complaints after malleable prosthesis implantation (MPI) is thinning of the
penis and decreasing girth. Some surgeons try to insert the largest diameter they can to improve patient satisfaction
Aim: To investigate if malleable rod diameter (MRD) has an impact on outcome and patient satisfaction
Methods: Consecutive malleable prosthesis implantation (MPI) was assessed in a high-volume center over 1 year.
The same preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative protocols were used for all patients and one brand of the
malleable device was used only. We recorded MRD and length for all patients. All patients had data on comorbidities
including glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and clinical Peyronie’s disease (PD). Revision cases and those who
lost for follow-up were excluded from the study. We also excluded patients operated on by low-volume surgeons.
All complications, minor (edema, ecchymosis, pain), and major (infection and erosion) were recorded. After 1-
year, patients were assessed and given a Likert scale from 1 to 5 where 5 is most satisfied with their MPI. We stratified
patients according to MRD into 2 groups: group A for diameter 9.5 and 11 mm and group B for 13 mm.
Outcome: : Larger diameter of malleable penile implants may be associated with more complications
Results: 183 patients had full data and filled the questionnaire after 1-year follow-up. All patients had Coloplast,
Genesis penile implants. Major complications rate (infection, erosion, and removal) was significantly higher in group
B 11% vs 1.2% in group A (P = .016). At 4 weeks postoperative visit, 90 % of group A showed no complications
vs 60% only in group B that was statistically significant (P = .0003). Satisfaction rate was more in patients in group
A (88.6%) compared to patients in group B (75.7%) but this did not reach to be statistically significant (P = .0519)
Clinical Implications: MRD predicts outcome.
Strengths & Limitations: The strengths of our study include that it is the first prospective study with good
number of malleable implants. Limitations include: no validated satisfaction instrument and MRD choice was
based on surgeon preference.
Conclusions: Larger diameter of malleable penile implants are not associated with a higher rate of patient satisfaction
penis and decreasing girth. Some surgeons try to insert the largest diameter they can to improve patient satisfaction
Aim: To investigate if malleable rod diameter (MRD) has an impact on outcome and patient satisfaction
Methods: Consecutive malleable prosthesis implantation (MPI) was assessed in a high-volume center over 1 year.
The same preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative protocols were used for all patients and one brand of the
malleable device was used only. We recorded MRD and length for all patients. All patients had data on comorbidities
including glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and clinical Peyronie’s disease (PD). Revision cases and those who
lost for follow-up were excluded from the study. We also excluded patients operated on by low-volume surgeons.
All complications, minor (edema, ecchymosis, pain), and major (infection and erosion) were recorded. After 1-
year, patients were assessed and given a Likert scale from 1 to 5 where 5 is most satisfied with their MPI. We stratified
patients according to MRD into 2 groups: group A for diameter 9.5 and 11 mm and group B for 13 mm.
Outcome: : Larger diameter of malleable penile implants may be associated with more complications
Results: 183 patients had full data and filled the questionnaire after 1-year follow-up. All patients had Coloplast,
Genesis penile implants. Major complications rate (infection, erosion, and removal) was significantly higher in group
B 11% vs 1.2% in group A (P = .016). At 4 weeks postoperative visit, 90 % of group A showed no complications
vs 60% only in group B that was statistically significant (P = .0003). Satisfaction rate was more in patients in group
A (88.6%) compared to patients in group B (75.7%) but this did not reach to be statistically significant (P = .0519)
Clinical Implications: MRD predicts outcome.
Strengths & Limitations: The strengths of our study include that it is the first prospective study with good
number of malleable implants. Limitations include: no validated satisfaction instrument and MRD choice was
based on surgeon preference.
Conclusions: Larger diameter of malleable penile implants are not associated with a higher rate of patient satisfaction