Until 2019, the European Association of Urology guidelines recommended the implantation of a penile prosthesis as a third-line therapy, which has since then changed to \"if other treatments fail or depending on the patient\'s preference\". Primary endpoint was to assess whether patients with a penile prosthesis and their partner would have preferred earlier implantation. Secondary endpoints were the reason why patient and partner wanted earlier implantation, how much earlier they wanted it, satisfaction of patient and partner and if patient and partner would have recommended the intervention. We selected patients with a virgin inflatable penile prosthesis operated between April 2013 and December 2019. We included 155 patients and 65 partners. Telephonic interview was conducted in a structured manner. Further data were collected retrospectively. The preference for earlier implantation was reported in 59.4% of patients and 46.2% of partners. Of them, respectively 53.2% and 46.6% would have wanted the prosthesis more than 5 years earlier. Satisfaction was seen in 83.2% of patients and 73.8% of partners. Respectively 82.6% and 78.4% of patients and partners would recommend the procedure. Our results indicate that a more patient-oriented approach with good counseling is desirable and that the \"three-level\" concept must be abandoned.

Despite significant scientific advances in the modern three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis implant surgery, it is not without surgical risks and can carry additional cosmetic and psychosocial consequences in poorly selected and consented individuals. To address this problem, an international group of key opinion leaders and high-volume prosthetic surgeons reviewed the current guidelines and clinical evidence, discussed their experiences, and formed a consensus regarding inflatable penile prosthesis surgery. The findings of this consensus panel were presented at the 17th biennial Asia Pacific Society of Sexual Medicine scientific meeting. The experts concluded that proper patient selection, informed consent and strict adherence to safe surgical principles are important to optimize clinical outcomes. Furthermore, most intraoperative complications, if recognized, can be addressed intraoperatively to enable placement of the device at the time of initial surgery. Men with significant corporal fibrosis due to Peyronie\'s disease, prior prosthesis explantation and priapism, and men who have undergone construction of a neophallus, as well as men who receive concurrent continence surgery, are complex cases requiring additional care and advanced techniques to obtain optimal surgical outcomes. Variability in patient care - in terms of postoperative antibiotic use, pain management, scrotal care, and cycling of the penile prosthesis implant - must be reduced to enable optimization and assessment of outcomes across patient groups.

Peyronie\'s disease (PD) is a challenging clinical entity. To assist clinicians with diagnosis and management, four separate organizations have published PD guidelines over the past five years, but there remains a lack of consensus and data-driven recommendations for many aspects of diagnosis and treatment.
To compare and contrast PD guidelines, highlighting key similarities and differences among the guideline panel recommendations and identify areas for further research.
We performed an extensive review to compare and contrast diagnosis and treatment recommendations from publically available published PD guidelines from four different organizations: American Urological Association, European Association of Urology, Canadian Urologic Association, and the International Society of Sexual Medicine.
Key similarities and differences with regards to definition, evaluation, nonsurgical and surgical treatments were compared.
Points of general consensus among the guideline panels included: History is adequate for diagnosis of PD, and intracavernosal injection is a gold standard to evaluate penile deformity prior to invasive intervention. Careful counseling with shared decision-making is required prior to treatment. In general, plication and incision and/or grafting surgery is reserved for patients with preserved erectile function whereas penile prosthesis implantation is the only surgical option for PD patients with erectile dysfunction. Overall, nonsurgical treatments have inferior evidence of efficacy with these being the main area of controversy; however, all societies recognize that intralesional injections may be used. 0Further research into the pathophysiology of PD may direct novel treatments targeted towards early intervention and rigorous outcomes research may direct best practices for the surgical treatment of PD in the future.
PD is a challenging clinical entity. Direct comparison of the published PD guidelines highlights clear standards of care as well as areas where more research is needed to promote higher levels of evidence-based practice.
To our knowledge this is the first report to directly compare and contrast published guidelines pertaining to the diagnosis and management of PD. Limitations include the lack of evidence-quality review pertaining to individual guideline recommendations, although this was not the aim of this review.
We highlight consensus of major urologic societies on many aspects of work up and management of PD with notable exceptions which may guide further research. Manka MG, White LA, Yafi FA, et al. Comparing and Contrasting Peyronie\'s Disease Guidelines: Points of Consensus and Deviation. J Sex Med 2021;18:363-375.

暂无摘要。

The implantation of a penile prosthesis is considered a third-line treatment and is indicated in patients who do not respond adequately to pharmacotherapy or require definitive treatment. Currently, the most used devices are 3-component penile prostheses, which presently account for more than 90% of the implants used.
We reviewed the evidence and the recommendations of the clinical practice guidelines regarding surgery in patients with erectile dysfunction.
The recommendations of the clinical practice guidelines on surgery in patients with erectile dysfunction are summarized as follows: men with erectile dysfunction should be informed about the option of penile prosthesis implant treatment, commenting on the benefits, risks and consequences; men with erectile dysfunction who have agreed to receive penile prosthesis should be advised on post-surgical expectations; penile prosthesis implants should not be performed in patients with systemic, cutaneous or urinary tract infection; in young men with erectile dysfunction and focal penile or pelvic arterial obstruction who do not have generalized vascular disease or veno-occlusive dysfunction, penile arterial reconstruction can be considered; in men with erectile dysfunction, penile venous surgery is not recommended.
The use of penile prostheses offers high satisfaction rates to both the patient and his partner. However, it is crucial to adequately inform and warn patients about possible complications and consequences.

A lack of uniformity exists for insurance payer coverage for all categories of penile prostheses (PP). We sought to determine common insurance coverage criteria and barriers to implantation across common insurance plans from healthcare referral regions (HRR) nationwide. Coverage criteria and stipulations were reviewed regarding erectile dysfunction (ED) etiology, ED duration, contributing comorbid conditions, medications, drug use, diagnostic tests, use of procedures and prior interventions. Seventy of 100 plans included coverage criteria. 36.1% provided coverage only in cases of gender dysphoria. 27.7% required documentation of trial, contraindication or intolerance to pharmacologic therapy, with varying descriptors of what this entailed. 13.8% required at least consideration of prior pharmacologic therapy. 4.2% required trial or contraindication to classic second-line therapies. 25.0% stated that ED must be organic. Psychogenic ED was covered by 12.5% of plans. Eleven plans required at least 6 or 12 months of symptoms. Laboratory evaluation to rule out hypogonadism or hyperprolactinemia was required by five plans. Insurance coverage criteria for PP placement were highly variable by state and plan. Coverage is provided for PP implantation in most cases for ED of organic etiology following failure of pharmacologic therapy when contributing comorbidities are optimally managed.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Penile curvature can be congenital or acquired. Acquired curvature is secondary due to La Peyronie (Peyronie\'s) disease.
OBJECTIVE: To provide clinical guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of penile curvature.
METHODS: A systematic literature search on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of penile curvature was performed. Articles with the highest evidence available were selected and formed the basis for assigning levels of evidence and grades of recommendations.
RESULTS: The pathogenesis of congenital penile curvature is unknown. Peyronie\'s disease is a poorly understood connective tissue disorder most commonly attributed to repetitive microvascular injury or trauma during intercourse. Diagnosis is based on medical and sexual histories, which are sufficient to establish the diagnosis. Physical examination includes assessment of palpable nodules and penile length. Curvature is best documented by a self-photograph or pharmacologically induced erection. The only treatment option for congenital penile curvature is surgery based on plication techniques. Conservative treatment for Peyronie\'s disease is associated with poor outcomes. Pharmacotherapy includes oral potassium para-aminobenzoate, intralesional treatment with verapamil, clostridial collagenase or interferon, topical verapamil gel, and iontophoresis with verapamil and dexamethasone. They can be efficacious in some patients, but none of these options carry a grade A recommendation. Steroids, vitamin E, and tamoxifen cannot be recommended. Extracorporeal shock wave treatment and penile traction devices may only be used to treat penile pain and reduce penile deformity, respectively. Surgery is indicated when Peyronie\'s disease is stable for at least 3 mo. Tunical shortening procedures, especially plication techniques, are the first treatment options. Tunical lengthening procedures are preferred in more severe curvatures or in complex deformities. Penile prosthesis implantation is recommended in patients with erectile dysfunction not responding to pharmacotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: These European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines summarise the present information on penile curvature. The extended version of the guidelines is available on the EAU Web site (www.uroweb.org/guidelines/).