Literature DB >> 31243354

An outcomes analysis of penile prosthesis implantation following radical cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion: a multicentric retrospective cohort study.

Marco Falcone1, Luigi Pucci2, Giulio Garaffa3, Andrea Cocci4, Arianna Gillo5, Marco Capece6, Carlo Ceruti1, Massimiliano Timpano1, Omid Sedigh1, Mirko Preto7, Gideon Blecher3, Francesco Chiancone2, Maurizio Carrino2, Luigi Rolle1, Paolo Gontero1.   

Abstract

There is limited scientific literature regarding the management outcomes for end-stage erectile dysfunction (ED) following radical cystoprostatectomy (RCP). This study aims to evaluate the surgical outcomes of penile prosthesis (PP) implantation. A retrospective analysis over 17 years (2004-2017) was performed from the clinical records of patients in four tertiary referral centres, whom previously had undergone RCP, followed by PP implantation for end-stage ED. Outcome measures include both intra and postoperative complications, operative duration, a 5-point Likert hematoma scale as well as length of hospital stay. Additionally, a matched-pair cohort analysis was performed, dividing patients in 2 groups according to the type of urinary diversion (neobladder versus ileal conduit/cutaneous ureterostomy). The median time elapsed between RCP and PP implantation was 38 months (IQR 20-56). The median follow-up was 18 months (IQR 12-156). A 3-piece inflatable PP was implanted in 43 patients (91.5%) whereas a semirigid device was implanted in the remainder. Reservoir position was extra-peritoneal (utilising a separate abdominal incision) in 24 patients (54.8%), while an ectopic high-submuscular placement was preferred in the remainder. PP infection and mechanical failure occurred in 1 (2.1%) and 3 cases (6.3%) respectively. The comparative analysis of surgical outcomes did not show any statistically significant difference between the two groups. Our evidence suggests that PP implantation in patients with refractory ED following RCP may represent a safe and effective procedure associated with a low incidence of complications. The main limitation of this study is represented by the non-randomised, retrospective nature as well as the lack of patients' functional outcomes and the limited follow-up.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31243354     DOI: 10.1038/s41443-019-0171-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Impot Res        ISSN: 0955-9930            Impact factor:   2.896


  2 in total

Review 1.  Surgical tips in difficult penile prosthetic surgery: a narrative review.

Authors:  Nicolò Schifano; Paolo Capogrosso; Onur Omer Cakir; Federico Dehò; Giulio Garaffa
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2022-10-19       Impact factor: 2.408

2.  Robotic radical cystectomy with concomitant implantation of 3-piece penile prosthesis: a one-step solution.

Authors:  Alessandro Izzo; Giuseppe Quarto; Giovanni Grimaldi; Luigi Castaldo; Raffaele Muscariello; Dario Franzese; Paola Del Prete; Matteo Ferro; Daniela Barberio; Ida Bolognini; Attilio Antonio Montano Bianchi; Riccardo Autorino; Sisto Perdonà
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2021-06-15
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.