Literature DB >> 15947649

A survey of patients with inflatable penile prostheses for satisfaction.

Mary Jo Brinkman1, Gerard D Henry, Steven K Wilson, John R Delk, George A Denny, Michael Young, Mario A Cleves.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We assessed patient satisfaction with 3 types of penile prostheses, namely the AMS 700 Series(R), Mentor Alpha 1(R) and Mentor Alpha NB(R).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects consisted of 330 patients selected by stratified, systematic random sampling from among 1,298 subjects undergoing virgin 3-piece inflatable penile implant surgeries performed by the same surgical team at 1 hospital between January 1992 and December 1998. Data were collected by computer assisted telephone interviewing with a survey developed by the authors. The survey consisted of 37 questions in 7 sections, including 1 demographic section and 6 patient satisfaction sections.
RESULTS: Of the 330 patients selected 248 (75%) could be contacted. Of these, 199 (80%) responded to the full survey and the remaining 49 (20%) agreed to respond only to the question, "How satisfied are you with the prosthesis?" Of the 199 full responders 12 (6%) had AMS implants and 187 (94%) had Mentor implants. Of the 49 single question responders 5 (10%) had AMS implants and 44 (90%) had Mentor implants. Of the 248 patients the overall satisfaction rate was 69%. Although there was no significant difference at the 5% level in patient satisfaction by implant type, responses tended to favor the Alpha IPPs in terms of overall sexual satisfaction (p =0.058), natural feeling of the prosthesis (p =0.061), flaccid appearance of the penis when deflated (p =0.054), and education with demonstration of inflation and deflation (p =0.075).
CONCLUSIONS: There was a high degree of overall patient satisfaction across implant types.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15947649     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000161608.21337.8d

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  12 in total

1.  Penoscrotal versus minimally invasive infrapubic approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement: a single-center matched-pair analysis.

Authors:  Pietro Grande; Gabriele Antonini; Cristiano Cristini; Ettore De Berardinis; Antonio Gatto; Giovanni Di Lascio; Andrea Lemma; Giuseppe Gentile; Giovanni Battista Di Pierro
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Penile prosthesis implantation for the treatment for male erectile dysfunction: clinical outcomes and lessons learnt after 955 procedures.

Authors:  E Chung; C T Van; I Wilson; R A Cartmill
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  [The "right" patient for implant surgery in urology : Why patient selection, informed consent, and communication are so important for patient satisfaction].

Authors:  C Leiber; A Katzenwadel; D Schlager
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction rates among elderly male aged ≥75 years with inflatable penile prosthesis implant for medically refractory erectile dysfunction.

Authors:  Eric Chung; Matt Solomon; Ling DeYoung; Gerald B Brock
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-05-26       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Prospective and long-term evaluation of erect penile length obtained with inflatable penile prosthesis to that induced by intracavernosal injection.

Authors:  Run Wang; Galen E Howard; Anthony Hoang; Jiu-Hong Yuan; Hao-Cheng Lin; Yu-Tian Dai
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2009-06-15       Impact factor: 3.285

6.  Worldwide trends in penile implantation surgery: data from over 63,000 implants.

Authors:  Wesley Baas; Blake O'Connor; Charles Welliver; Peter J Stahl; Doron S Stember; Steven K Wilson; Tobias S Köhler
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-02

7.  Contemporary patient satisfaction rates for three-piece inflatable penile prostheses.

Authors:  Raymond M Bernal; Gerard D Henry
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2012-07-26

8.  [Quality of life in patients who suffered erectile dysfunction and underwent penile implant surgery in terms of sexual satisfaction of the patient and partner].

Authors:  K-M Arndt; A Chomicz; K-P Jünemann; D Osmonov
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 9.  Narrative review of penile prosthetic implant technology and surgical results, including transgender patients.

Authors:  Michael Polchert; Brian Dick; Omer Raheem
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-06

10.  Subarachnoid versus General Anesthesia in Penile Prosthetic Implantation: Outcomes Analyses.

Authors:  Gerard D Henry; Antonino Saccà; Elizabeth Eisenhart; Mario A Cleves; Andrew C Kramer
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2012-08-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.