OBJECTIVES: To study patient satisfaction and complications appeared in a series of patients with erectile dysfunction undergoing implant of penile prosthesis. METHODS: Retrospective study of all patients undergoing surgical treatment for erectile dysfunction by penile prosthesis implant between 1993 and 2003. Collected data included patient age at the time of surgery, previous treatment, and significant medical history. We reviewed the models of prosthesis employed, incisions, and complications appeared. Finally, a questionnaire was elaborated to establish the level of patient satisfaction. RESULTS: 24 prostheses were implanted between 1993 and 2003. Mean patient age was 56.6 +/- 7.56 years (36-63), median 59.5 yr. Penile-scrotal incision was employed in 13 (54.16%) patients, suprapubic incision in 6 (25%) and subcoronal incision in 1 (4.16%). Type of prosthesis: semirrigid AMS 600 9 (37.5%), semirrigid AMS 650 10 (41.66%); the two component hydraulic prosthesis AMS Ambicor was used only in one case. Six (25%) patients presented complications. 16.66% were minor, cavernositis, pain, hematoma or prosthesis extrusion. Prosthesis extraction was necessary in 2 (8.33%) cases. 13 (54.16%) patients responded to the telephone survey 85% of them use their prosthesis. 54% percent refer adequate self-satisfaction and partner satisfaction (well satisfied/much satisfaction). 23% not too bad, and the remainder 23% bad or very bad. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the highest rate of postoperative complications, penile prosthesis is adequately accepted by patients with erectile dysfunction, even malleable models. Patient satisfaction is high, being higher in partners. Most patients would desire to undergo surgery again if they were in the same situation.
OBJECTIVES: To study patient satisfaction and complications appeared in a series of patients with erectile dysfunction undergoing implant of penile prosthesis. METHODS: Retrospective study of all patients undergoing surgical treatment for erectile dysfunction by penile prosthesis implant between 1993 and 2003. Collected data included patient age at the time of surgery, previous treatment, and significant medical history. We reviewed the models of prosthesis employed, incisions, and complications appeared. Finally, a questionnaire was elaborated to establish the level of patient satisfaction. RESULTS: 24 prostheses were implanted between 1993 and 2003. Mean patient age was 56.6 +/- 7.56 years (36-63), median 59.5 yr. Penile-scrotal incision was employed in 13 (54.16%) patients, suprapubic incision in 6 (25%) and subcoronal incision in 1 (4.16%). Type of prosthesis: semirrigid AMS 600 9 (37.5%), semirrigid AMS 650 10 (41.66%); the two component hydraulic prosthesis AMS Ambicor was used only in one case. Six (25%) patients presented complications. 16.66% were minor, cavernositis, pain, hematoma or prosthesis extrusion. Prosthesis extraction was necessary in 2 (8.33%) cases. 13 (54.16%) patients responded to the telephone survey 85% of them use their prosthesis. 54% percent refer adequate self-satisfaction and partner satisfaction (well satisfied/much satisfaction). 23% not too bad, and the remainder 23% bad or very bad. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the highest rate of postoperative complications, penile prosthesis is adequately accepted by patients with erectile dysfunction, even malleable models. Patient satisfaction is high, being higher in partners. Most patients would desire to undergo surgery again if they were in the same situation.