Penoscrotal approach for inflatable penile prosthesis implant: why it should be preferred

被引:0
作者
Ricapito, Anna [1 ,2 ]
Sedigh, Omid [3 ,4 ]
Rubino, Matteo [1 ,2 ]
Gobbo, Andrea [3 ,5 ]
Falagario, Ugo G. [2 ]
Annese, Pasquale [2 ]
Mancini, Vito [2 ]
Ferro, Matteo [6 ]
Buffi, Nicolo [3 ,5 ]
Cormio, Luigi [2 ]
Carrieri, Giuseppe [2 ]
Busetto, Gian Maria [2 ]
Bettocchi, Carlo [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Foggia, Androl Unit, Dept Urol & Organ Transplantat, Foggia, Italy
[2] Univ Foggia, Dept Urol & Organ Transplantat, Foggia, Italy
[3] Humanitas Univ, Dept Biomed Sci, Milan, Italy
[4] Humanitas Gradenigo Hosp, Dept Urol & Reconstruct Androl, Turin, Italy
[5] IRCCS Humanitas Res Hosp, Dept Urol, Milan, Italy
[6] IRCCS, European Inst Oncol IEO, Milan, Italy
来源
MINERVA UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY | 2023年 / 75卷 / 06期
关键词
Penile prosthesis; Erectile dysfunction; Male urologic surgical procedures; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; SURGICAL APPROACH; INFRAPUBIC APPROACH; SURGERY; PLACEMENT; MANAGEMENT; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.23736/S2724-6051.23.05475-7
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
INTRODUCTION: Inflatable penile prosthesis are the definitive treatment for erectile dysfunction. The two most used surgical approaches to position the implants are the penoscrotal and the infrapubic. Current trends showed that the penoscrotal approach is extensively preferred however, there is not conclusive evidence demonstrating the superiority of one technique over the other. The aim of this review is to summarize the scientific evidence available and to underline strengths and weaknesses of the two techniques. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and National Center for Biotechnology Information PubMed to identify relevant published articles. The included studies had to explicitly examine the use of three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis with a focus on the surgical access method and complications. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twenty-six articles were included in the review: seven narrative reviews, five retrospective observational studies, five prospective observational studies, and nine mixed methodology studies. The most frequent approach was the penoscrotal, which was also found more comfortable (RG1) by the operators in one study. The infrapubic approach lasts less and one study demonstrated higher satisfaction by the patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence of significant differences in complications among the penoscrotal and infrapubic approaches. While the infrapubic approach is faster and patients were more satisfied, the penoscrotal approach is the most used by far. This is likely related to the more straightforward procedure through this access and the excellent surgical field exposure. For these reasons, it is also preferred in the most complex cases.
引用
收藏
页码:711 / 717
页数:7
相关论文
共 35 条
[11]   Penoscrotal versus minimally invasive infrapubic approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement: a single-center matched-pair analysis [J].
Grande, Pietro ;
Antonini, Gabriele ;
Cristini, Cristiano ;
De Berardinis, Ettore ;
Gatto, Antonio ;
Di Lascio, Giovanni ;
Lemma, Andrea ;
Gentile, Giuseppe ;
Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista .
WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 36 (07) :1167-1174
[12]   Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Opinion: Why I prefer the penoscrotal access [J].
Gromatzky, Celso .
INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2015, 41 (03) :410-411
[13]   The penoscrotal surgical approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement [J].
Gupta, Nikhil K. ;
Ring, Josh ;
Trost, Landon ;
Wilson, Steven K. ;
Koehler, Tobias S. .
TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2017, 6 (04) :628-638
[14]   Implants, Mechanical Devices, and Vascular Surgery for Erectile Dysfunction [J].
Hellstrom, Wayne J. G. ;
Montague, Drogo K. ;
Moncada, Ignacio ;
Carson, Culley ;
Minhas, Suks ;
Faria, Geraldo ;
Krishnamurti, Sudhakar .
JOURNAL OF SEXUAL MEDICINE, 2010, 7 (01) :501-523
[15]  
Henry Gerard D, 2015, Sex Med Rev, V3, P36, DOI 10.1002/smrj.39
[16]  
Henry GD, 2009, J SEX MED, V6, P675, DOI [10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.01145.x, 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.01200.x]
[17]   Infrapubic approach for placement of inflatable penile prosthesis: contemporary review of technique and implications [J].
Jayadevan, Rajiv ;
Eleswarapu, Sriram V. ;
Mills, Jesse N. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPOTENCE RESEARCH, 2020, 32 (01) :10-17
[18]   What urologists need to know about female-to-male genital confirmation surgery (phalloplasty and metoidioplasty): techniques, complications, and how to deal with them [J].
Jun, Min S. ;
Crane, Curtis N. ;
Santucci, Richard A. .
MINERVA UROLOGICA E NEFROLOGICA, 2020, 72 (01) :38-48
[19]   Streamlined Approach for Infrapubic Placement of an Inflatable Penile Prosthesis [J].
Karpman, Edward .
ADVANCES IN UROLOGY, 2012, 2012
[20]   OUTCOMES OF IPP PLACEMENT BY SURGICAL APPROACH, PENOSCROTAL VS INFRAPUBIC, RESULTS FROM A PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER STUDY [J].
Karpman, Edward ;
Bella, Anthony ;
Brant, William ;
Christine, Brian ;
Kansas, Bryan ;
Jones, LeRoy ;
Kohler, Tobias ;
Bennett, Nelson ;
Khera, Mohit ;
Henry, Gerard .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 193 (04) :E569-E570