Literature DB >> 15526101

Radiological assessment of penile prosthesis: the role of magnetic resonance imaging.

Ignacio Moncada1, José Jara, Ramiro Cabello, Juan Ignacio Monzo, Carlos Hernández.   

Abstract

Penile implants offer a dependable way of restoring erections in virtually all motivated patients. The satisfaction rate among both patients and partners using these devices is high. Advances in technology have reduced the infection rate and increased the mechanical reliability of these products. However, too often, urologists do not present this option with the same authority as other treatments. The reason is fear of complications and lack of expertise in managing them. Although they are not very frequent, complications may be catastrophic. The most significant postoperative complication associated with the implant surgery is infection of the device, which is quite frequent, but some other important complications are distal and proximal perforation of the albuginea, SST deformity, "S-shaped" deformity of the penis, erosion of a component, and mechanical malfunction of the device. The best way to manage complications is to prevent them, but we do not have many diagnostic tools available. Diagnosis is based on clinical history and physical examination, but imaging techniques are also needed to explore the prosthesis "in situ" to plan the surgical approach if it is needed. In this article we review the different imaging techniques used for the diagnosis of complications of prosthetic surgery of the penis, including conventional radiology, use of sonography, the role of CT scan and the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the penile prosthesis. We conclude that MRI is the most valuable method for the diagnosis of penile prosthesis complications. It is not an ionizing radiation imaging method and has the unique feature among imaging techniques of demonstrating penile anatomy in three orthogonal planes. It is superior to any other imaging method in the definition of soft tissue contrast.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15526101     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-004-0427-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  23 in total

Review 1.  Surgery of the penis: reconstruction and prostheses.

Authors:  B Kaftan; M Fisch; F Schreiter
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.309

Review 2.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the penis.

Authors:  A Vossough; E S Pretorius; E S Siegelman; P Ramchandani; M P Banner
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec

Review 3.  Radiology of penile prostheses.

Authors:  R H Cohan; N R Dunnick; C C Carson
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Long-term mechanical reliability of multicomponent inflatable penile prosthesis: comparison of device survival.

Authors:  F Dubocq; M V Tefilli; E L Gheiler; H Li; C B Dhabuwala
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Quantifying risk of penile prosthesis infection with elevated glycosylated hemoglobin.

Authors:  S K Wilson; C C Carson; M A Cleves; J R Delk
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Management of erectile impotence. Use of implantable inflatable prosthesis.

Authors:  F B Scott; W E Bradley; G W Timm
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1973-07       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Self-contained, inflatable penile prosthesis: magnetic resonance appearance.

Authors:  M F Levin; P L Munk; A D Vellet; J L Chin
Journal:  Australas Radiol       Date:  1994-02

8.  Clinical guidelines panel on erectile dysfunction: summary report on the treatment of organic erectile dysfunction. The American Urological Association.

Authors:  D K Montague; J H Barada; A M Belker; L A Levine; P W Nadig; C G Roehrborn; I D Sharlip; A H Bennett
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Normal penile anatomy and abnormal penile conditions: evaluation with MR imaging.

Authors:  H Hricak; M Marotti; T J Gilbert; T F Lue; L H Wetzel; J W McAninch; E A Tanagho
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Mechanical reliability, surgical complications, and patient and partner satisfaction of the modern three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis.

Authors:  F E Govier; R P Gibbons; R J Correa; T R Pritchett; D Kramer-Levien
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 2.649

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Penile prosthesis surgery in the management of erectile dysfunction.

Authors:  Hossein Sadeghi-Nejad; Mina Fam
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2013-07-02
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.