Abstract
Authors
Van Renterghem, K.
Key Words
infected penile implant, revision penile implant.
Description
In this video a reimplantation of an Inflatable Penile Implant (IPP) is demonstrated in a patient who underwent previously an explant because of infection. Three years earlier patient was operated for a localised prostate cancer with an open retropubic prostatectomy in another institute. Two years later he was implanted with a IPP in the same hospital. The size of the cylinders was quite different comparing the right side to the left ( right side 19 cm; left side 13 cm). One week post-operatively there was a revision necessary due to a “collection”, another week later he was explanted because of an infected IPP. Three months after explant he underwent a uneventful reimplantation at our institute. We used a penoscrotal access, fibrosis was treated with extensive dilation with Rossello dilators and using the Otis urethrotome. A symmetrical 18 + 3 cm Titan IPP was implanted, the reservoir was placed high submuscular on the right side and filled with 60 cc. This case demonstrates that high volume centres should take care of penile implant surgery since revision surgery has a worse outcome. The incidence of reoperation is highest in the first year after implantation.
Acknowledgements
Educational grant from Coloplast.
Disclosures
consultant for Coloplast, Boston Scientific
References
- Onyeji et al. Impact of surgeon case volume on reoperation rates after inflatable penile prosthesis surgery. J Urol 2017 Jan; 197 (1): 223-229
- Hinds PR, Wilson SK, Sadeghi-Nejad H. Dilemmas of inflatable penile prosthesis revision surgery: what practices achieve the best outcomes and the lowest infection rates? J Sex Med 2012 Oct; 9(10): 2483-91
- Mirheydar et al. Reoperation rates for penile prosthetic surgery. J Sex Med 2016 Jan; 13 (1): 129-33
Submit your own video!
We welcome you to participate in the Journal of Sexual Medicine (VJSM)