In:
Sexual Medicine, Oxford University Press (OUP), Vol. 6, No. 1 ( 2018-03-01), p. 24-29
Abstract:
The inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) is typically the preferred implant for Peyronie’s disease (PD) and malleable penile prostheses (MPPs) have been discouraged. Aims To evaluate the effectiveness and patient satisfaction of the MPP vs IPP in patients with PD. Methods Men with PD and erectile dysfunction who elected for penile implant surgery constituted the study population. Preoperatively, demographic and comorbidity parameters were recorded. Curvature was measured with a goniometer at maximum rigidity after intracavernosal injection of a vasoactive agent. Postoperatively, overall satisfaction was measured at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months on 5-point Likert scale from 1 (dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). Results 166 men with a mean age of 59 ± 10 years were analyzed. The mean preoperative curvature in the entire cohort was 65° (range = 30–130°). 94% of patients with MPP had total resolution of their curvature at the end of the operation, whereas 8 patients (6%) had residual curvature (25–40°). In the IPP group 25 of 30 (83.3%) had a straight penis at the end of surgery, whereas 5 of 30 (16.7%) had residual curvature, with the mean magnitude being 33° in the MPP group and 30° in the IPP group. 86% of all patients had diabetes. There were no differences between the 2 implant groups in age, hemoglobin A1c, body mass index, or smoking status. The mean patient satisfaction was 4.42 ± 0.70 (range = 2–5) and there was no difference between the 2 groups. The mean follow-up period was 23.4 months (range = 6–29 months). Conclusion We found that the MPP is as effective as the IPP in curvature correction in patients with PD, with similar patient satisfaction for the 2 groups.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
2050-1161
DOI:
10.1016/j.esxm.2017.10.004
Language:
English
Publisher:
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Publication Date:
2018
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2734882-9
