Penile length is preserved after implant surgery

Abstract

ConclusionsPI surgery does not significantly decrease penile size compared to the preoperative assessment. The outcome was not affected by co-morbidities. The preoperative length and girth correlated well with the immediate postoperative erect penis, although girth was not necessarily comparable in this series of patients measured under anaesthesia. Recording penile dimensions in the clinic and agreeing these with patients' preoperatively may be a way of improving satisfaction levels with this surgery.

Malleable Penile Implant Rod Diameter Predicts Complications and Patient Satisfaction

“…17 Unrealistic expectations and weight gain (excess pre-pubic fat) are additional contributors. 11 No doubt that the best implant size for a certain patient is the best fitting, neither the oversize nor the undersize. One of the most common complaints after MPI is decreased girth.…”

“…MPP disadvantages discussed were: poorer concealability; reduced girth; relative instability and rigidity compared to IPP. 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 11 , 13 Choosing the type of device was based on the patient's preference.…”

“…One of the greatest contributors to patient dissatisfaction after penile implant surgery is patient concern about postoperative penile length and girth. 11 For MPP, failure of the device to expand may lead to a narrow penis, which for some men is a concern, and for men with a longer penis may lead to penile instability despite good rigidity. 12 , 13 Thus, some surgeons attempt to circumnavigate to this issue by inserting the largest diameter MPP rod possible in an effort to maximize patient satisfaction.…”

Clinical Recommendations From the European Society for Sexual Medicine Exploring Partner Expectations, Satisfaction in Male and Phalloplasty Cohorts, the Impact of Penile Length, Girth and Implant Type, Reservoir Placement, and the Influence of Comorbidities and Social Circumstances

“…In this later article, although overall satisfaction was quite high, 92% 4À5 score, this was not correlated with girth and the study included both inflatable and malleable devices. 101 Other articles have described a notable decrease of penile loss in girth of 0.5 to 2.6 cm 96,109 (Table 2). Overall, however, evidence exploring different outcomes between PP types on girth expansion are poor.…”

“…95,99 One recently published observational study on 74 patients demonstrated an increase of 3 cm of the stretched penile length when an AMS LGX 700 was implanted, followed by twice daily vacuum device therapy for 6 months. 100 Although most studies suggest an increase in length and patients may also perceive an increase in length, 80,101 the evidence is conflicted with studies also claiming a measurable decrease in length in 12% (15/122) of patients (includes both inflatable and malleable devices, 9 or in length terms, from 0.2 to 3.0 cm). 102,103 Importantly, there are significant numbers of patients (42À46%) that are dissatisfied with the appearance of their erect penis post-PP insertion 104 (Table 2).…”