INTRODUCTION: Among the many treatments for erectile dysfunction, implantation of a penile prosthesis has been associated with high patient satisfaction rates. Prosthesis replacement has become an accepted procedure in the event of device malfunction or complications, but to our knowledge, there are no data regarding the impact of implant replacement on patients and partner satisfaction. AIM: The aim of our study was to assess and to compare the level of satisfaction, with a first or second penile prosthesis implantation (PPI), in men with refractory erectile dysfunction and their partners. METHODS: A survey study based on a five-item questionnaire was carried out at our center between January 1999 and January 2012. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure used was the level of patient and partner satisfaction with sexual intercourse after PPI. RESULTS: Of the 190 eligible patients, 149 (78%) completed the survey (110 underwent a first implant and 39 a reimplant). Seventy-nine percent of first-time implanted patients and 80% of the reimplanted patients (P > 0.05; not significant [ns]) reported satisfactory sexual intercourse (very or moderately satisfied), while 74% and 80% of their partners reported satisfactory intercourses, respectively (P > 0.05; ns). Overall, 73.7% of first implants and 70% of second implants reported that they would undergo the procedure again if the PPI failed (P > 0.05; ns). With regards to cosmetic aspects, 13% of the first implants' and 15% of second implants' partners reported either penile shortness or soft glans as the main causes of their dissatisfaction. Only 2.4% of first implants and 1% of reimplanted patients expressed difficulty in manipulating the device. CONCLUSIONS: PPI is successful in returning the ability for satisfactory sexual intercourse to both first implant and reimplanted patients and their respective partners.
INTRODUCTION: Among the many treatments for erectile dysfunction, implantation of a penile prosthesis has been associated with high patient satisfaction rates. Prosthesis replacement has become an accepted procedure in the event of device malfunction or complications, but to our knowledge, there are no data regarding the impact of implant replacement on patients and partner satisfaction. AIM: The aim of our study was to assess and to compare the level of satisfaction, with a first or second penile prosthesis implantation (PPI), in men with refractory erectile dysfunction and their partners. METHODS: A survey study based on a five-item questionnaire was carried out at our center between January 1999 and January 2012. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure used was the level of patient and partner satisfaction with sexual intercourse after PPI. RESULTS: Of the 190 eligible patients, 149 (78%) completed the survey (110 underwent a first implant and 39 a reimplant). Seventy-nine percent of first-time implanted patients and 80% of the reimplanted patients (P > 0.05; not significant [ns]) reported satisfactory sexual intercourse (very or moderately satisfied), while 74% and 80% of their partners reported satisfactory intercourses, respectively (P > 0.05; ns). Overall, 73.7% of first implants and 70% of second implants reported that they would undergo the procedure again if the PPI failed (P > 0.05; ns). With regards to cosmetic aspects, 13% of the first implants' and 15% of second implants' partners reported either penile shortness or soft glans as the main causes of their dissatisfaction. Only 2.4% of first implants and 1% of reimplanted patients expressed difficulty in manipulating the device. CONCLUSIONS: PPI is successful in returning the ability for satisfactory sexual intercourse to both first implant and reimplanted patients and their respective partners.
Authors: Nannan Thirumavalavan; Billy H Cordon; Martin S Gross; Jeffrey Taylor; Jean-Francois Eid Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2018-06-05 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Jeffrey D Campbell; Ernest Pang Chan; Andrew Di Pierdominico; Serkan Karakus; Bruce Trock; Gerald B Brock; Arthur L Burnett Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2022-02 Impact factor: 1.862