medigraphic.com
ISSN 2305-7939 (Electronic)

2020, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

RCU 2020; 9 (1)

Efficacy and safety of malleable penile prosthesis´ implantation in patients with erectile dysfunction

Quintana RM, Fragas VR, Guzmán MR

Language: Spanish
References: 31
Page: 24-34
PDF size: 823.38 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Penile prostheses are devices that are surgically implanted. They generate penile rigidity through a non-pharmacological mechanical system. This type of prosthesis was implanted for the first time in Cuba 33 years ago in the "Hermanos Ameijeiras" Surgical Clinical Hospital to treat erectile sexual dysfunction.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of malleable penile prosthesis´ implantation in patients with erectile dysfunction.
Methods: An observational descriptive, cross-sectional and retrospective study was conducted in 96 patients with erectile dysfunction, which were implanted with a malleable penile prosthesis. All were seen in the "Dr. Salvador Allende" Teaching Surgical-Clinical Hospital between 2012 and 2017. For the study, there were taken into account the complications, the quality of penetration, sensitivity and the degree of satisfaction during sexual activity, both in the patients as well as in their partners.
Results: Diabetes mellitus was the cause of the erectile dysfunction in 40.6% of the cases. After the implant, the 80.2% achieved the penetration without difficulty. The sensitivity showed no changes in 56.3 %, while 87.5% of patients and 91.7% of the partners were satisfied with the procedure. There were complications observed in 18.8 % of the patients.
Conclusions: This implant was effective and safe in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. It provided an adequate quality of the penetration in a high percentage of patients; it improved the sensitivity in half of them, while the majority was satisfied with the procedure.


REFERENCES

  1. Burnett AL. Evaluation and management of Erectile Dysfunction. Chapter 24. Campbell and Walsh, Urology 10th edition. 2012.

  2. Águila F, Vinay J, Palma C. Prótesis de pene: una solución efectiva. Rev Chil Urol 2015 [acceso: 15/01/2019]; 80(2):69-71. Disponible en: https://www.revistachilenadeurologia.cl/protes is-de-pene-una-solucion-efectiva/

  3. Anaissie J, Yafi FA. A review of surgical strategies for penile prosthesis implantation in patients with Peyronie's disease. Transl Androl Urol. 2016 [acceso: 15/01/2019]; 5(3):342-50. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PM C4893506/

  4. Burns-Cox N, Burston A, Gingell JC. Fifteen years experiences of penile prosthesis insertion. Int J Impot Res 1997 [acceso: 15/01/2019]; 9(4):211-6. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/944241 9

  5. Mulcahy JJ. The development of modern penile implants. Sex Med Rev. 2016 [acceso: 15/01/2019]; 4(2):177-89. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/275303 83

  6. Trost LW, Baum N, Hellstrom WJ. Managing the difficult penile prosthesis patient. J Sex Med 2013 [acceso: 23/01/2019]; 10(4):893-906. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/235515 38

  7. Martin Morales A. Comentario editorial de: Manejo quirúrgico actual de la enfermedad de Peyronie grave. Arch Esp Urol 2010 [acceso: 23/01/2019]; 63(9):771-2. Disponible en: http://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/urol/v63n9/04.pdf

  8. Akakpo W, Pineda MA, Burnett AL. Critical analysis of satisfaction assessment after penile prosthesis surgery. Sexual Medicine Reviews. 2017 [acceso: 23/01/2019]; 5(2): 244-51. Disponible en: https://www.smr.jsexmed.org/article/S2050- 0521(17)30001-X/pdf

  9. De Nunzio C, Roehrborn CG, Andersson KE, McVary KT. Erectile dysfunction and lower urinary tract symptoms. Eur Urol Focus. 2017 [acceso: 23/01/2019]; 3(4-5):352-63. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/291916 71

  10. García Cruz E, Carrión A, Ajami T, Álvarez M, Correas MA, García B, et al. The patient's comorbidity burden correlates with the erectile dysfunction severity. Actas Urol Esp. 2018 Jan- Feb; 42(1):57-63. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/286418 7

  11. Plata ML, Caicedo JI, Trujillo CG, Mariño Álvarez AM, Fernández N, Gutiérrez A, et al. Prevalence of metabolic syndrome and its association with lower urinary tract symptoms and sexual function. Actas Urol Esp. 2017 Oct; 41(8):522-28. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/283908 36

  12. Beilan J, Strakosha R, Palacios DA, Rosser CJ. The postoperative morbidity index: a quantitative weighing of postoperative complications applied to urological procedures. BMC Urol. 2014 Jan 3; 14:1. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/243834 57

  13. Kardasevic A, Milicevic S. Correlation of subjective symptoms in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and erectile dysfunction. Med Arch. 2017 Feb; 71(1):32-6. Disponible: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/284286 71

  14. Burns-Cox N, Burston A, Gingell JC. Fifteen years experiences of penile prosthesis insertion. Int J Impot Res 1997; 9(4):211-6. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/944241 9

  15. Levine LA, Becher EF, Bella AJ, Brant WO, Kohler TS, Martínez-Salamanca JI, et al. Penile prosthesis surgery: current recommendations from the international consultation on sexual medicine. J Sex Med. 2016 Apr; 13(4):489-518. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/270452 55

  16. Sevinc C, Ozkaptan O, Balaban M, Yucetas U, Karadeniz T. Outcome of penile prosthesis implantation: are malleable prostheses an appropriate treatment option in patients with erectile dysfunction caused by prior radical surgery? Asian J of Androl. 2016; 18:1-5. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PM C5507097/

  17. Altunkol A, Erçil H, Şener NC, Ceber S, Vuruşkan E, Ortoğlu F, et al. Clinical evaluation of outcomes of penile prosthesis implantation and partner satisfaction. Erciyes Tip Dergisi. 2014; 36(4):148-51. Disponible en: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273 520311

  18. Bozkurt IH, Arslan B, Kozacioglu Z, Yonguc T, Degirmenci T, Gunlusoy B, et al. Does the etiology affect the outcome and satisfaction rates of penile prosthesis implantation surgery? Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2014 Nov; 30(11):570-3. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/254580 47

  19. Trost LW, Baum N, Hellstrom WJ. Managing the difficult penile prosthesis patient. J Sex Med. 2013; 10(4):893-906. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/235515 38

  20. Perovic SV, Djinovic RP. Manejo quirúrgico actual de la enfermedad de peyronie grave. Arch Esp Urol 2015; 63(1):755-70. Disponible en: http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_artte xt&pid=S0004-06142010000900003

  21. Yoon Seob J, Young Hwii K, Phil Hyun S, Ki Hak M. Long-term survival and patient satisfaction with inflatable penile prosthesis for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Korean J Urol. 2015; 56:461-5. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/260788 44

  22. Falcone M, Rolle L, Ceruti C, Timpano M, Sedigh O, Preto M, et al. Prospective analysis of the surgical outcomes and patients' satisfaction rate after the AMS spectra penile prosthesis implantation. Urology. 2013 Aug; 82(2):373-6. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/237912 18

  23. Thomas A, Carroll R, Manecksha RP. Extended long term functional outcome of inflatable penile prosthesis in a single institution. Ir Med J. 2011 Feb; 104(2):53-5. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/214658 79

  24. Madiraju SK, Wallen JJ, Rydelek SP, Carrion RE, Perito PE, Hakky TS. Biomechanical studies of the inflatable penile prosthesis: A Review. Sex Med Rev. 2019 Apr; 7(2):369-75. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/306551 95

  25. Reddy AG, Alzweri LM, Gabrielson AT, Leinwand G, Wayne JG. Hellstr. Role of penile prosthesis in priapism: A Review. World J Mens Health. 2018; 36(1):4-14. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PM C5756805/

  26. Amin S. Herati, Eric M. Penile prosthesis biofilm formation and emerging therapies against them. Transl Androl Urol. 2018 Dec; 7(6):960-7. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

  27. Dawn LE, Henry GD, Tan GK, Wilson SK. Biofilm and infectious gents present at the time of penile prosthesis revision surgery: times are a changing. Sex Med Rev. 2017 Apr; 5(2): 236-43. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/282421 78

  28. Trost LW, McCaslin R, Linder B, Hellstrom WJG. Long-term outcomes of penile prostheses for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Expert Review of Medical Devices. Disponible en: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ref/10.1586/ erd.12.92?scroll=top

  29. Rodríguez Tolrá J, Muñoz Rodríguez J, Martínez Barea V, Rodríguez Pérez D, Franco Miranda E. Nuestra experiencia en el implante de prótesis de pene de dos componentes tipo Ambicor®. Rev Int Androl 2014; 7(4):210-4. Disponible en: https://www.elsevier.es/esrevista- revista-internacional-andrologia

  30. Bozkurt IH, Arslan B, Yonguc T, Kozacioglu Z, Degirmenci T, Gunlusoy B, et al. Patient and partner outcome of inflatable and semi-rigid penile prosthesis in a single institution. Int Braz J Urol. 2015 May-Jun; 41(3):535-41. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

  31. Tsambarlis PN, Chaus F, Levine LA. Successful placement of penile prostheses in men with severe corporal fibrosis following vacuum therapy protocol. J Sex Med. 2017 Jan; 14(1):44- 6. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27938991




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com