Korean J Urol.  2015 Jun;56(6):461-465. 10.4111/kju.2015.56.6.461.

Long-term survival and patient satisfaction with inflatable penile prosthesis for the treatment of erectile dysfunction

• Ji YS
• Ko YH
• Song PH
• Moon KH

• KMID: 2160587
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2015.56.6.461

Abstract

PURPOSE
We investigated the long-term survival and patient satisfaction with an inflatable penile prosthesis as a treatment for refractory erectile dysfunction (ED).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Between July 1997 and September 2014, a total of 74 patients underwent implantation of an inflatable penile prosthesis. The present mechanical status of the prosthesis was ascertained by telephone interview and review of medical records, and related clinical factors were analyzed by using Cox proportional hazard regression model. To investigate current status and satisfaction with the devices, novel questionnaires consisting of eight items were administered.
RESULTS
The mean (+/-standard deviation) age and follow-up period were 57.0+/-12.2 years and 105.5+/-64.0 months, respectively. Sixteen patients (21.6%) experienced a mechanical failure and 4 patients (5.4%) experienced a nonmechanical failure at a median follow-up of 98.0 months. Mechanical and overall survival rates of the inflatable penile prosthesis at 5, 10, and 15 years were 93.3%, 76.5%, and 64.8% and 89.1%, 71.4%, and 60.5%, respectively, without a statistically significant correlation with host factors including age, cause of ED, and presence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus. Overall, 53 patients (71.6%) completed the questionnaires. The overall patient satisfaction rate was 86.8%, and 83.0% of the patients replied that they intended to repeat the same procedure. Among the 8 items asked, satisfaction with the rigidity of the device received the highest score (90.6%). In contrast, only 60.4% of subjects experienced orgasm.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of our study suggest that excellent long-term reliability and high patient satisfaction rates make the implantation of an inflatable penile prosthesis a recommendable surgical treatment for refractory ED.

Keyword

Erectile dysfunction; Patient satisfaction; Penile prosthesis; Survival

MeSH Terms

Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Erectile Dysfunction/physiopathology/*surgery
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Male
Middle Aged
Orgasm
*Patient Satisfaction
*Penile Prosthesis
Prosthesis Failure
Prosthesis Implantation/methods
Treatment Outcome

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Kaplan-Meier mechanical survival curve (A) and overall survival curve (B) according to time after implantation of AMS 700 CXM (AMS, Minnetonka, MN, USA) inflatable penile prosthesis.

Reference

1. Consensus development conference statement. National Institutes of Health. Impotence. December 7-9, 1992. Int J Impot Res. 1993; 5:181–284.

2. Hellstrom WJ, Montague DK, Moncada I, Carson C, Minhas S, Faria G, et al. Implants, mechanical devices, and vascular surgery for erectile dysfunction. J Sex Med. 2010; 7(1 Pt 2):501–523.

3. Scott FB, Bradley WE, Timm GW. Management of erectile impotence: use of implantable inflatable prosthesis. Urology. 1973; 2:80–82.

4. Malloy TR, Wein AJ, Carpiniello VL. Improved mechanical survival with revised model inflatable penile prosthesis using rear-tip extenders. J Urol. 1982; 128:489–491.

5. Malloy TR, Wein AJ, Carpiniello VL. Reliability of AMS M700 inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology. 1986; 28:385–387.

6. Daitch JA, Angermeier KW, Lakin MM, Ingleright BJ, Montague DK. Long-term mechanical reliability of AMS 700 series inflatable penile prostheses: comparison of CX/CXM and Ultrex cylinders. J Urol. 1997; 158:1400–1402.

7. Wilson SK, Delk JR, Salem EA, Cleves MA. Long-term survival of inflatable penile prostheses: single surgical group experience with 2,384 first-time implants spanning two decades. J Sex Med. 2007; 4(4 Pt 1):1074–1079.

8. Kim DS, Yang KM, Chung HJ, Choi HM, Choi YD, Choi HK. AMS 700CX/CXM inflatable penile prosthesis has high mechanical reliability at long-term follow-up. J Sex Med. 2010; 7:2602–2607.

9. Montorsi F, Rigatti P, Carmignani G, Corbu C, Campo B, Ordesi G, et al. AMS three-piece inflatable implants for erectile dysfunction: a long-term multi-institutional study in 200 consecutive patients. Eur Urol. 2000; 37:50–55.

10. Wang R, Howard GE, Hoang A, Yuan JH, Lin HC, Dai YT. Prospective and long-term evaluation of erect penile length obtained with inflatable penile prosthesis to that induced by intracavernosal injection. Asian J Androl. 2009; 11:411–415.

11. Dhar NB, Angermeier KW, Montague DK. Long-term mechanical reliability of AMS 700CX/CXM inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol. 2006; 176(6 Pt 1):2599–2601.

12. Ferguson KH, Cespedes RD. Prospective long-term results and quality-of-life assessment after Dura-II penile prosthesis placement. Urology. 2003; 61:437–441.

13. Rajpurkar A, Dhabuwala CB. Comparison of satisfaction rates and erectile function in patients treated with sildenafil, intracavernous prostaglandin E1 and penile implant surgery for erectile dysfunction in urology practice. J Urol. 2003; 170:159–163.

14. Candela JV, Hellstrom WJ. Three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis implantation: a comparison of the penoscrotal and infrapubic surgical approaches. J La State Med Soc. 1996; 148:296–301.

15. Vitarelli A, Divenuto L, Fortunato F, Falco A, Pagliarulo V, Antonini G, et al. Long term patient satisfaction and quality of life with AMS700CX inflatable penile prosthesis. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2013; 85:133–137.

16. Natali A, Olianas R, Fisch M. Penile implantation in Europe: successes and complications with 253 implants in Italy and Germany. J Sex Med. 2008; 5:1503–1512.