Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

An outcomes analysis of over 200 revision surgeries for penile prosthesis implantation: a multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: Inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation is a well-established treatment for medically refractory erectile dysfunction, with long-term reliability. Overall survival is 96% at 5 years and 60% at 15 years for primary (virgin) implantation.

AIM: The aim of this study was to explore factors associated with success and complications of IPP revision surgery in a multicenter study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reasons for revision including mechanical issues, patient dissatisfaction, corporal deformity, and supersonic transport (SST) deformity were recorded.

METHODS: At four institutions, 214 clinically uninfected IPP revisions were performed between November 2000 and November 2007. Data were incomplete for 28 cases (14%). Failure-free survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier's Meier product limit method.

RESULTS: The majority of revisions were secondary to mechanical failure (N = 109; 65%) and combined erosion or infection (N = 17 + 15 = 32; 19%). Sixteen percent (N = 26) were carried out on functional uninfected prostheses secondary to patient dissatisfaction (N = 9), SST deformity (N = 10), scrotal hematoma (N = 2), or upsize revision because of corporal fibrosis (N = 5). Average age at revision was 66 years. Mean follow-up time was 55.7 months. In this study, 12 individuals required a secondary revision procedure or suffered a complication. Despite prior reports of high infection rates with revision surgery, only 5.7% of clinically uninfected and noneroded prostheses were complicated by infection or impending extrusion/erosion, following a revision washout protocol. Overall, 93% of cases were successfully revised, providing functioning IPPs.

CONCLUSIONS: For this study population, component exchange followed by revision washout showed a low incidence of infection and subsequent mechanical failure.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app