Inflatable penile prosthesis in the radical prostatectomy patient: a review

Bennett, Nelson; Huang, I-Shen

doi:10.12688/f1000research.15241.1

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Implantation of an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) is an effective and safe treatment option for men who do not respond to conventional medical therapy. 10 Although IPP implantation was reported to result in better sexual function, and the patients had better feeling as well as higher satisfaction than with other treatment options, it also might result in mechanical failure that requires prosthesis repair, explant, or replacement. 11 Moreover, infections commonly result from bacterial implantation on the surface of the device during IPP implantation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of a three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis combined with a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor on erectile dysfunction

Wang

Liu

et al. 2021

J Int Med Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To investigate the therapeutic effect of implanting a three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) combined with the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor sildenafil in severe erectile dysfunction (ED) patients. Methods This randomized controlled study included 123 ED patients. Sixty-two patients received the IPP implantation and 61 patients received the IPP implantation and the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor sildenafil. Erectile function and sexual life quality were evaluated using the five-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and modified Sexual Life Quality Questionnaire–Quality of Life domain (mSLQQ-QoL), respectively. Serum interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, vascular cell adhesion molecule (VCAM)-1, and intercellular adhesion molecule (ICAM)-1 levels were assessed. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to assess the overall IPP survival. Results Implantation of the three-piece IPP with sildenafil improved erectile function and sexual life quality, alleviated the inflammatory response, reduced the complication rate, and improved overall IPP survival. Conclusion Implantation of the three-piece IPP combined with a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor significantly improved clinical outcomes and the prognosis in ED patients.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of a three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis combined with a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor on erectile dysfunction

Wang

Liu

et al. 2021

J Int Med Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) is a viable option for ED as primary treatment and in patients who have failed (or cannot tolerate) medical management [ 12 13 ]. It has patient satisfaction rates above 90% and is associated with greatly improved erectile function with the mean International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) increasing from 8.2 to 20.6 after 1 year [ 14 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationships between erectile dysfunction, prostate cancer treatment type and inflatable penile prosthesis implantation

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The prevalence of erectile dysfunction (ED) and the utilization of inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) among prostate cancer patients are understudied. The aim of the study was to examine the relationships between ED, prostate cancer treatment type and IPP implantation in a national cohort. Materials and Methods We identified a retrospective cohort of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare patients diagnosed with locoregional prostate cancer between 2006 and 2011 and treated with surgery or radiation. Chi-square tests were used to detect significant differences in ED rates as well as use of IPP among the subset with ED. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with the use of IPP. Results Among 31,233 patients in our cohort, 10,334 (33.1%) received prostatectomy and 20,899 (66.9%) received radiation. ED within 5 years was significantly more common in the prostatectomy group relative to those the radiation group (65.3% vs. 33.8%, p<0.001). In the subset of 13,812 patients with ED, the radiation group had greater median time to ED diagnosis compared to the prostatectomy group (346 vs. 133 days, p<0.001). IPP implantation was more frequent for prostatectomy patients than for radiation patients (3.6% vs. 1.4%, p<0.001). Cancer treatment type, race, and marital status were significantly associated with IPP utilization. Conclusions ED is highly prevalent among prostate cancer patients, and IPP implantation is be underutilized. ED rates, time to ED diagnosis and utilization of IPP differed significantly by prostate cancer treatment type.

show abstract

“…The penile prosthesis was introduced in the 1970s and remained the most effective treatment to erectile dysfunction refractory to oral and injectable drugs [ 1 , 2 ]. In the last 40 years, several improvements in materials and surgical techniques led to high satisfaction rates of 80 to 90% [ 3 , 4 ]. However, complications do exist and range from 7 to 20% [ 5 ], mostly related to mechanical malfunction, infection, and erosion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of penile prosthesis infection and meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus role

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Infection is the most feared complication of a penile prosthesis. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is widely known to increase the risk of several infections, but its role in the penile prosthesis is still controversial. This systematic review aims to show the contemporary scenario of penile prosthesis infection and present a meta-analysis about DM contribution to penile prosthesis infection. Methods The review was performed with no language or time limitation, including ten databases. The included articles were about the male population who received a penile prosthesis with no model restriction, with a minimum follow up of 1 year, and outcomes adequately reported. Results The mean infection incidence of penile prosthesis ranged from 0.33 to 11.4%. In early 2000, the general incidence of infection was 3 to 5%, then, the introduction of coated materials decreased it to 0.3 to 2.7%. The meta-analysis showed that diabetes mellitus is related to an increased risk of penile prosthesis infection with an odds ratio of 1.53 (95% CI 1.15–2.04). Conclusions Penile prosthesis infection decreased in the last decades but remains a significant cause of reoperation, and it is related to lower prosthesis survival. Meta-analysis concludes that diabetes mellitus is related to a higher risk of penile prosthesis infection.

show abstract

Inflatable penile prosthesis in the radical prostatectomy patient: a review

Cited by 9 publications

References 55 publications

Effect of a three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis combined with a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor on erectile dysfunction

Effect of a three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis combined with a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor on erectile dysfunction

Relationships between erectile dysfunction, prostate cancer treatment type and inflatable penile prosthesis implantation

A systematic review of penile prosthesis infection and meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus role

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About