Ernest Pang Chan1, Nahid Punjani1, Jeffrey Douglas Campbell1, Haider Abed2, Gerald Brock3. 1. Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, St. Joseph's Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada. 2. Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. 3. Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, St. Joseph's Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: gebrock88@gmail.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Reoperations are necessary in approximately 30% of penile prostheses over 15 years following original implantation. AIM: To determine the most common indications for initial penile prosthesis reoperation at our institution and to describe technical alterations that have improved postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent penile prosthesis reoperation surgery at a single, high-volume Canadian center between 2006 and 2018 was performed. Patient demographic information, prosthetic device factors, and surgical complications were analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcomes were the indications for and variables associated with initial penile prosthesis reoperation. RESULTS: During the study period, 99 first-time penile prosthesis reoperations were performed out of 1,161 penile prosthesis procedures (Figure 1). This included 14 (14.1%) explants, 32 (32.3%) revisions, and 53 (53.5%) explant and reimplants. Indications for reoperation included 49 (49.5%) mechanical failures, 28 (28.3%) technical causes (such as correction of malposition or device herniation), and 12 (12.1%) procedures to treat chronic postoperative pain. Median follow-up was 78.5 months, and median time to reoperation was 46 months. Mechanical failures commonly occurred in the tubing (n = 13, 26.5%) and cylinders (n = 13, 26.5%). The most frequently repositioned component was the valve pump (n = 11, 39.3%). Infection-related indications for reoperation were uncommon (n = 10, 10.1%). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: More than a quarter of penile prosthesis reoperations may have been preventable with alterations in surgical technique, device positioning, and postoperative care. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This study evaluates a range of indications for initial penile prosthesis reoperation performed by a high-volume single surgeon over a 12-year period. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study, loss of patients to follow-up, and lack of etiological determinants of prosthesis failure. CONCLUSIONS: Reoperation for device repositioning and herniation was required for more than a quarter of the initial penile prosthesis implants. Modifications in surgical technique and perioperative care can help reduce the incidence of these technical causes for reoperation. Chan EP, Punjani N, Campbell JD, et al. Indications for Penile Prosthesis Revision: Lessons Learned to Limit Technical Causes of Reoperation. J Sex Med 2019; 16:1444-1450.
INTRODUCTION: Reoperations are necessary in approximately 30% of penile prostheses over 15 years following original implantation. AIM: To determine the most common indications for initial penile prosthesis reoperation at our institution and to describe technical alterations that have improved postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent penile prosthesis reoperation surgery at a single, high-volume Canadian center between 2006 and 2018 was performed. Patient demographic information, prosthetic device factors, and surgical complications were analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcomes were the indications for and variables associated with initial penile prosthesis reoperation. RESULTS: During the study period, 99 first-time penile prosthesis reoperations were performed out of 1,161 penile prosthesis procedures (Figure 1). This included 14 (14.1%) explants, 32 (32.3%) revisions, and 53 (53.5%) explant and reimplants. Indications for reoperation included 49 (49.5%) mechanical failures, 28 (28.3%) technical causes (such as correction of malposition or device herniation), and 12 (12.1%) procedures to treat chronic postoperative pain. Median follow-up was 78.5 months, and median time to reoperation was 46 months. Mechanical failures commonly occurred in the tubing (n = 13, 26.5%) and cylinders (n = 13, 26.5%). The most frequently repositioned component was the valve pump (n = 11, 39.3%). Infection-related indications for reoperation were uncommon (n = 10, 10.1%). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: More than a quarter of penile prosthesis reoperations may have been preventable with alterations in surgical technique, device positioning, and postoperative care. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This study evaluates a range of indications for initial penile prosthesis reoperation performed by a high-volume single surgeon over a 12-year period. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study, loss of patients to follow-up, and lack of etiological determinants of prosthesis failure. CONCLUSIONS: Reoperation for device repositioning and herniation was required for more than a quarter of the initial penile prosthesis implants. Modifications in surgical technique and perioperative care can help reduce the incidence of these technical causes for reoperation. Chan EP, Punjani N, Campbell JD, et al. Indications for Penile Prosthesis Revision: Lessons Learned to Limit Technical Causes of Reoperation. J Sex Med 2019; 16:1444-1450.