Skip to main content

Penile Implants

Types and Current Indications

  • Chapter
Male Sexual Function

Part of the book series: Current Clinical Urology ((CCU))

  • 139 Accesses

Abstract

Although it is estimated that nearly 20 million Americans suffer from erectile dysfunction (ED), the true prevalence of this disorder is unknown (1). Worldwide studies have demonstrated that the prevalence of ED increases with age. The overall population growth, an increase in the elderly population, the introduction of effective oral medications for ED, and the intensified public awareness and education may result in a higher rate of seeking and using treatment (2). Patients with severe end organ failure who do not respond to any nonsurgical therapy will eventually be candidates for penile prosthesis. Although the percentage of such patients compared to the total number of patients with ED may be small, penile prosthesis implantation will remain a viable option because of the large patient base. Vendors claim that sales of penile prostheses have been relatively stable in the last decade. Since the introduction of penile prosthesis implantation to treat male ED in the 1970s, the modifications and improvements of penile prostheses have remarkably improved the device’s reliability, longevity, and the prosthetic surgery outcome (3). In this chapter, we review different penile prostheses available in the United States and their clinical indications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Lewis RW, McKinlay J, Laumann E, et al. Epidemiology and natural history of erctile dysfunction; risk factors including iatrogenic and aging. In: Proceedings of First International Consultation on Erectile Dysfunction. Jardin A, Wagner G, Khoury S, et al., eds., Health Publication Ltd., 1, 2000; 19.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Shabsigh R. Editorial: penile prostheses toward the end of the millennium. J Urol 1998; 159: 819.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang R, Lewis RW. Reoperation for penile prosthesis implantation. In: Current Clinical Urology Series on Urologic Prostheses. Carson CC, ed., Humana, New Jersey, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Krauss DJ, Lantinga LJ, Carey MP, et al. Use of the malleable penile prosthesis in the treatment of erectile dysfunction: a prospective study of post-operative adjustment. J Urol 1989; 142: 988–991.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Montorsi F, Guazzoni G, Bergamaschi F, et al. Patient-partner satisfaction with semirigid penile prosthesis for Peyronie’s disease: a 5-year followup study. J Urol 1993; 150: 1819–1821.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Marzi M, Zucchi A, Lombi R, et al. Implant surgery in Peyronie’s disease. Urol Int 1997; 58: 113–116.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gross AJ, Sauerwein DH, Kutzenberger J, et al. Penile prostheses in paraplegic men. Br J Urol 1996; 78: 262 264.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Wilson SK. Penile prosthesis implantation: pearls, pitfalls, and perils. In: Male Infertility and Sexual Dysfunction. Hellstrom WJG, ed., Springer, New York 1997; 529.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Mulcahy JJ. Overview of penile implants. In: Topics in clinical urology: diagnosis and management of male sexual dysfunction Mulcahy JJ, ed., IgakuShoin, New York 1997; 218.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kearse WS Jr., Sago AL, Peretsman SJ, et al. Report of a multicenter clinical evaluation of the Dura-II penile prosthesis. J Urol 1996; 155: 1613–1616.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kabalin JN, Kuo JC. Long-term followup of and patient satisfaction with the Dynaflex self-contained inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol 1997; 158: 456–459.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Wilson SK, Cleves M, Delk JR. Long-term results with Hydroflex and Dynaflex penile prostheses: device survival comparison to multicomponent inflatables. J Urol 1996; 155: 1621–1623.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Anafarta K, Yaman O, Aydos K. Clinical experience with Dynaflex penile prostheses in 120 patients. Urology 1998; 52: 1098–1100.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Govier FE. The surgical management of erectile dysfunction utilizing inflatable prosthetic devices. AUA Update Series 1996; 15: 78.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dubocq F, Tefilli MV, Gheiler EL, et al. Long-term mechanical reliability of multicomponent inflatable penile prosthesis: comparison of device survival. Urology 1998; 52: 277–281.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hakim LD, Kulaksizoglu H, Hambill BK, et al. A guide to safe corporotomy incisions in the presence of underlying inflatable penile cylinders: results of in vitro and in vivo studies. J Urol 1996; 155: 918–923.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Levine LA, Estrada CR, Mattem Q, et al. Two center experience with the Ambicor penile prosthesis. J Uro1163: Abstract 2000, 999, 225.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Carson CC. Inflatable penile prosthesis. In: Textbook of Erectile Dysfunction. Carson CC, Kirby R, Goldstein I, eds., Isis Medical Media Ltd Oxford 1999; 423.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wilson SK, Delk JR. A new treatment for Peyronie’s disease: modeling the penis over an inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol 1994; 152: 1121–1123.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Dubocq FM, Bianco FJ Jr., Maralani SJ, et al. Outcome analysis of penile implant surgery after external beam radiation for prostate cancer. J Urol 1997; 158: 1787–1790.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Khoudary KP, DeWolf WC, Bruning CO III. Morgentaler A. Immediate sexual rehabilitation by simultaneous placement of penile prosthesis in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: initial results in 50 patients. Urology 1997; 50: 395–399.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Upadhyay J, Shekarriz B, Dhabuwala CB. Penile implant for intractable priapism associated with sickle cell disease. Urology 1998; 51: 638, 639.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lewis R. Surgery for erectile dysfunction. In: Campbell’s Urology 17th edition. Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED Jr., et al, eds., W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia 1998; 1215.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Garber BB, Marcus SM. Does surgical approach affect the incidence of inflatable penile prosthesis infection? Urology 1998; 52: 291–293.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Wilson SK, Cleves MA, Delk JR. Comparison of mechanical reliability of original and enhanced Mentor Alpha I penile prosthesis. J Urol 1999; 162: 715–718.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Wilson SK, Delk JR, Dhabuwala CB. Early results with new lockout valve to prevent auto inflation of Mentor Alpha 1 penile prosthesis. J Urol 1999; 161: (4) suppl; 259.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Goldstein I, Geffin M. Mentor Lock-out Valve study group. Prevention of auto-inflation in the Mentor Alpha-1 three piece inflatable penile prosthesis: preliminary results of the Lock-out Valve study. J Urol 1999; 161: (4) suppl; 260.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kowalczyk JJ, Mulcahy JJ. Penile curvatures and aneurysmal defects with the Ultrex penile prosthesis corrected with insertion of the AMS700CX. J Urol 1996; 156: 398–401.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Holloway FB, Farah RN. Intermediate term assessment of the reliability, function and patient satisfaction with the AMS700 Ultrex penile prosthesis. J Urol 1997; 157: 1687–1691.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wang, R., Lewis, R.W. (2001). Penile Implants. In: Mulcahy, J.J. (eds) Male Sexual Function. Current Clinical Urology. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-098-8_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-098-8_15

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-5701-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-098-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics