BACKGROUND: Erectile dysfunction can cause self-withdrawal and decreased quality of life. Patients who do not respond to pharmacological therapy and other conservative treatments are urged to undergo penile prosthesis implantation. Malleable penile prosthesis was the first prosthesis developed, but then inflatable penile prosthesis was developed to give a more natural erection. There is no meta-analysis comparing inflatable and malleable penile prostheses in terms of safety and efficacy. This study is conducted to evaluate patient and partner satisfaction, ease of use, mechanical failure, and infection rate in patients who underwent penile prosthesis implantation.
METHODS: This meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocols. Five eligible studies were included from Pubmed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and SemanticScholar databases.
RESULTS: In this study, patient and partner satisfaction are significantly better (OR 3.39, 95% CI 1.66-6.93, p = 0.0008) (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.75-3.08, p < 0.00001). Mechanical failure is also significantly higher in inflatable penile prostheses (OR 5.60, 95% CI 2.02-15.53, p = 0.0009). There is no significant difference in terms of ease of use and infection rate in inflatable or malleable penile prostheses.
CONCLUSIONS: This study concluded that inflatable penile prosthesis is better in terms of patient and partner satisfaction, but mechanical failures occur more frequently in this type of prosthesis.

BACKGROUND: Penile prosthesis implantation is the last resort for refractory erectile dysfunction. Reservoir placement is one of the biggest challenges in inflatable penile prosthesis implant surgery in several cases, especially in patients with abnormal pelvic anatomy. Ectopic reservoir placement with supramuscular approach has many advantages in these cases.
RESULTS: No complications were encountered except wound site infection in 2 patients which could be controlled with antibiotic treatment. EDITS scores were not statistically different between patients divided into 2-year groups according to follow-up time. Median values of EDITS scores were high in all groups, suggesting that couples had high sexual satisfaction both in the long term and in the short term.
CONCLUSIONS: We recommend placement of the supramuscular tube and reservoir through the incision described, especially in patients whose pelvic anatomy has been modified by lower abdominal surgery.
RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: L’implantation d’une prothèse pénienne est le dernier recours pour les dysfonctions érectiles réfractaires. La mise en place d’un réservoir est l’un des plus grands défis de la chirurgie d’implant de prothèse pénienne gonflable dans de nombreux cas, en particulier chez les patientes présentant une anatomie pelvienne anormale. RéSULTATS: Aucune complication n’a été rencontrée, à l’exception d’une infection du site de la plaie chez 2 patients, qui a pu être contrôlée par un traitement antibiotique. Les scores du questionnaire EDITS ne furent pas statistiquement différents entre les patients classés en groupes de 2 ans en fonction du temps de suivi. Les valeurs médianes des scores du questionnaire EDITS étaient élevées dans tous les groupes, ce qui suggère que les couples avaient une satisfaction sexuelle élevée à la fois à court et à long termes. CONCLUSIONS: Nous recommandons la mise en place du tube supramusculaire et du réservoir à travers l’incision décrite, en particulier chez les patients dont l’anatomie pelvienne a été antérieurement modifiée par une chirurgie abdominale basse.

BACKGROUND: In cases of a noninfected malfunctioning inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) device, surgeons often opt to exchange all of the device rather than the defective component for fear of an increased infection rate and future mechanical dysfunction.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether partial-component exchange of an IPP device has comparable outcomes to complete explant and replacement of an IPP device with or without a retained reservoir.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR guidelines. Searches were performed on MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, and the Cochrane Library from inception to June 2023, identifying studies reporting outcomes and complications of revision surgery for noninfected malfunctioning IPP devices. Three groups were compared: those undergoing single- or 2-component exchange, those with complete explantation and replacement, and those with replacement of all components while retaining the primary reservoir.
RESULTS: Analysis included 11 articles comprising 12 202 patients with complete device replacement, 234 with partial device exchange, and 151 with retained reservoirs following revision. Mean ages ranged from 62 to 68 years, with median follow-up times between 3 and 84 months. Partial-component exchange showed a higher infection rate (6.3%) as compared with complete replacement (2.7%) and reservoir retention (3.9%). Similarly, partial exchange had a higher complication rate (23.9%) when compared with complete replacement (11.3%) and reservoir retention (19.6%). Mechanical failure rates for partial exchange were similar across the 3 groups (10%, 2.8%, and 5.8%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Partial-component exchange during IPP revision is associated with higher infection and perioperative complication rates but comparable rates of mechanical failure as compared with complete-component replacement, with or without retaining the original reservoir.

BACKGROUND: Plaque incision and grafting (PEG) is a primary surgical therapy for severe penile curvature in Peyronie\'s disease (PD); However, it can increase the risk of erectile dysfunction (ED), particularly in patients with pre-operative mild ED. Soft penile prosthesis (SPP) implantation is a viable treatment option in such cases. This study aims to compare the outcomes of PEG-only approach to PEG plus SPP implantation.
METHODS: Between 2010 and 2019, 32 patients with PD and mild ED (5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function scores: 17-21) underwent PEG surgery. Two groups were defined based on the surgery type: PEG-only and PEG plus SPP. The long-term outcomes included correction of penile bending, erection quality, intercourse ability, penile length and sensitivity. The overall satisfaction and impact of surgery on sexual activity and quality of life were also assessed.
RESULTS: Of the 32 patients, 13 (40.6%) underwent PEG-only surgery, whereas 19 (59.4%) underwent PEG plus SPP. No significant differences were noted between the groups regarding pre-operative characteristics (all p > 0.1) or intra- and post-operative complication rates (all p > 0.2). The median patch area was larger in the PEG-only group (28 cm2 vs. 16.2 cm2; p = 0.001), whereas patients in the PEG plus SPP group were more likely to receive a single patch implant (100% vs. 53.8%; p < 0.001). The penile length increased in 18 patients (61.6%), with significant differences between the two groups (30% vs. 81.2%; p = 0.03). Overall, 14 patients (53.8%) reported greater satisfaction with their sexual life post-operatively, with comparable rates between the groups (p = 0.2). No significant differences were found in the post-operative 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function scores or severe post-operative ED (all p > 0.5).
CONCLUSIONS: SPP placement during corporoplasty in patients with mild ED is safe and feasible, and it may be a suitable option for patients uncertain about inflatable prosthesis placement. The use of SPP resulted in longer penile lengths and necessitated smaller grafts. However, further data are required to understand the long-term clinical implications of this approach.

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment options for patients with erectile dysfunction whose medical management has failed include the inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Many patients with an IPP require subsequent urologic surgery, during which the reservoir of the IPP can be injured.
OBJECTIVE: This review aims to present a summary of current literature related to iatrogenic injuries to the IPP sustained during urologic surgery.
METHODS: Two reviewers independently performed a systematic search on PubMed using standardized search terms to identify pertinent articles. After preliminary review, relevant studies were analyzed to identify the presence of perioperative complications resulting in IPP reservoir injury. Results were categorized by surgical procedures.
RESULTS: Among 13 articles included, all were based on urologic surgery. Four studies identified IPP reservoir injury as a result of surgical injury. Of these, injuries occurred during radical prostatectomy (n = 3) and prostatic urethral lift surgery (UroLift, n = 1). Most radical prostatectomy studies without IPP reservoir injuries also described intentional surgical techniques that were employed to prevent reservoir damage, including modulation of reservoir inflation-deflation (n = 3), temporary reservoir repositioning (n = 1), or reservoir capsule dissection to improve visualization (n = 1). Findings from an additional novel case report on IPP injury during a UroLift procedure are presented in this review.
CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of studies identified intraoperative IPP reservoir injury as a significant complication of urologic surgery, particularly during radical prostatectomy. Novel case report findings also contribute the only other case of IPP reservoir damage sustained from delivery of UroLift implants. Findings are used to create a standardized surgical checklist that guides perioperative planning measures prior to pursuing surgery in adjacent spaces.

BACKGROUND: The salvage procedure for infected penile implants (IPs) has been a subject of interest since its inception in the late 1980s, yet its widespread adoption remains limited. The aim of this study was to realize a systematic literature review to provide a comprehensive analysis of salvage techniques for IPs and assess their efficacy, specifically focusing on functional success.
METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, employing Mesh terms related to penile prosthesis, penile implant, infection, and salvage procedures. Articles in French or English were considered for the final analysis, with exclusion of literature reviews.
RESULTS: Fifteen articles detailing various salvage techniques for IPs were identified. Mulcahy\'s initial technique was described in 1996, and consisted of complete removal of infected components, extensive lavage, and subsequent replacement with a similar implant. Success rates ranged from 80% to 100%, with emerging trends favoring the use of malleable implants during salvage. Unfortunately, functional data remained limited. When salvage penile prosthesis placement involved a malleable prosthesis, between 20% and 33% of patients underwent conversion to hydraulic prosthesis.
CONCLUSIONS: The salvage procedure for infected penile implants is a reliable method, with success rates surpassing 80%. The need for comparative studies assessing the type of implant used during salvage is required to tailor conservative management strategies for optimal patient outcomes. Finally, few data have been published regarding subsequent conversions from malleable penile implants to hydraulic penile implants after salvage.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: About 10% of Peyronie\'s patients are complex cases with severe curvature (>60 degrees), ventral plaque, multiplanar curvature, hour-glass/hinge deformity, notching deformity, and ossified plaque. In patients with complex Peyronie\'s disease (PD), different techniques (shortening procedures, lengthening procedures, and penile prosthesis implantation (IPP)) may be necessary to achieve successful result. This review aims to analyze the various surgical techniques employed in the management of Peyronie\'s disease, with a specific focus on patients with complex deformity.
METHODS: Articles focusing on the surgical management of complex curvature in Peyronie\'s disease were searched in MEDLINE and PubMed published between 1990 and 2023.
RESULTS: Shortening procedures are linked to penile shortening and are not recommended for complex cases such as notching, hour-glass deformity, or ossified plaque. Lengthening procedures are suitable for addressing complex curvatures without erectile dysfunction (ED) and are a more appropriate method for multiplanar curvatures. Penile prosthesis implantation (IPP), with or without additional procedures, is the gold standard for patients with ED and Peyronie\'s disease. IPP should also be the preferred option for cases of penile instability (hinge deformity) and has shown high satisfaction rates in all complex cases.
CONCLUSIONS: While surgical interventions for complex curvature in Peyronie\'s disease carry inherent risks, careful patient selection, meticulous surgical techniques, and post-operative care can help minimize complications and maximize positive outcome.

BACKGROUND: With 50 years\' experience, inflatable penile implants are the preferred option for erectile dysfunction refractory to pharmacological and mechanical treatment. Technical and surgical improvements have optimized patient success and satisfaction. However, multi-factorial dissatisfaction persists.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to provide an overview of available technological improvements and innovations, as well as the perioperative management and complications of inflatable penile implant surgery.
METHODS: A literature review was carried out over the last twenty years to answer 4 questions: what are the different inflatable penile implants available in 2023, for which indications, results and complications.
RESULTS: Four companies propose inflatable penile implants in France. The main improvements have been in the various components of the prosthesis with better cylinder extension, more ergonomic reservoirs, and more manageable pumps, leading to a better durability. Indications have been extended to patients suffering from Peyronie\'s disease and in emergency cases of priapism. In response to demand from the transgender population, specific phalloplasty implants have been developed. New options are being developed for difficult cases of retracted penis. Results show a high satisfaction rate. Currently the main challenge is the management of infection with the development of rescue protocols using antibiotics to preserve implants - or replace them in a single operation.
CONCLUSIONS: After 50years\' experience, improvements in penile implants led to effective, satisfactory and safe treatment and can be proposed in new indications. Further development is sill necessary to offer solutions in difficult cases.

BACKGROUND: Variations in climate have been associated with a greater risk of surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, and changes in the skin microbiome; however, limited data exist on the impact of climate on inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) infections.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the impact of climate on the risk of IPP infections in a large international, multicenter cohort.
METHODS: We performed a multi-institutional, retrospective study of patients undergoing IPP surgery. We then evaluated whether the month or season, during which surgery was performed, affected device infections. Implant infections were defined as infections requiring device explantation. A univariate logistic regression analysis was undertaken.
RESULTS: Our primary outcome was implant infection.
RESULTS: A total of 5289 patients with a mean age of 62.2 ± 10.8 years received IPP placement. There was a fairly even distribution of implants performed in each season. A total of 103 (1.9%) infections were recorded. There were 32 (31.1%) IPP infections in patients who underwent surgery in the summer, followed by 28 (27.2%) in the winter, 26 (25.2%) in the spring, and 17 (16.5%) in the fall. No statistically significant differences were recorded in terms of season (P = .19) and month (P = .29). The mean daily temperature (P = .43), dew point (P = .43), and humidity (P = .92) at the time of IPP placement was not associated with infection.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide reassurance to prosthetic urologists that infection reduction strategies do not need to be tailored to local climate.
UNASSIGNED: Climate data were not directly recorded for each hospital, but rather based on the monthly averages in the city where the surgery was performed.
CONCLUSIONS: The climate at time of IPP placement and time of year of surgery is not associated with IPP infection risk.