Penile Wobble Effect: Proximal Corporal Deformities as a Cause of Penile Prosthesis Failure

Emad Rajih, Arthur Burnett

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: Penile structural defects can contribute toward penile prosthesis (PP) surgical complications and suboptimal outcomes. Despite modern improvements in techniques of inflatable PP (IPP) surgeries, suboptimal outcomes arise secondary to unrecognized proximal corporal abnormalities. Aim: To describe a new observation of IPP failure (wobbly penis) secondary to proximal corporal deformities. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Johns Hopkins institutional database of patients who had IPP surgery from May 2006 to March 2017. All cases requiring surgical revisions secondary to proximal corporal deformities were identified. Exclusion criteria included patients who had incidentally discovered proximal corporal deformities intraoperatively or were documented preoperatively to have had a corporal defect. Main Outcome Measures: Successful reimplantation of a functionally intact PP device. Results: On clinical grounds, we identified 5 patients with properly cycling but unstable prosthetic devices that were associated with proximal corporal dilatation (proximally from the penoscrotal junction). All patients underwent reduction corporoplasty with prosthesis replacements consisting of controlled expansion IPPs. 3 patients had undergone previous device replacements because of intact cycling but unstable and unusable IPP devices, whereas 2 had a single previous device insertion. Mean age at revision was 67 years. Median IPP duration was 17 years. Median number of previous IPP surgeries was 3. All patients reported IPP stability and satisfaction after revision (median follow-up = 6 months). Conclusions: Proximal corporal deformities could account for IPP failure. This condition can be under-recognized as observed in the present cases of multiple revisions with a normally cycling device that was not usable. Proper recognition of this problem allows the opportunity for surgical correction with reduction corporoplasty. Rajih E, Burnett AL. Penile Wobble Effect: Proximal Corporal Deformities as a Cause of Penile Prosthesis Failure. Sex Med 2018;X:XXX–XXX.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalSexual Medicine
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Penile Prosthesis
Prosthesis Failure
Equipment and Supplies
Replantation
Penis
Reoperation
Prostheses and Implants
Dilatation
Observation
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases

Keywords

  • Corpora Cavernosa
  • Corporoplasty
  • Erectile Dysfunction
  • Tunica Albuginea

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Dermatology
  • Urology
  • Behavioral Neuroscience

Cite this

Penile Wobble Effect : Proximal Corporal Deformities as a Cause of Penile Prosthesis Failure. / Rajih, Emad; Burnett, Arthur.

In: Sexual Medicine, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2f45045130bf40d6b9e77d394948d4b9,
title = "Penile Wobble Effect: Proximal Corporal Deformities as a Cause of Penile Prosthesis Failure",
abstract = "Introduction: Penile structural defects can contribute toward penile prosthesis (PP) surgical complications and suboptimal outcomes. Despite modern improvements in techniques of inflatable PP (IPP) surgeries, suboptimal outcomes arise secondary to unrecognized proximal corporal abnormalities. Aim: To describe a new observation of IPP failure (wobbly penis) secondary to proximal corporal deformities. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Johns Hopkins institutional database of patients who had IPP surgery from May 2006 to March 2017. All cases requiring surgical revisions secondary to proximal corporal deformities were identified. Exclusion criteria included patients who had incidentally discovered proximal corporal deformities intraoperatively or were documented preoperatively to have had a corporal defect. Main Outcome Measures: Successful reimplantation of a functionally intact PP device. Results: On clinical grounds, we identified 5 patients with properly cycling but unstable prosthetic devices that were associated with proximal corporal dilatation (proximally from the penoscrotal junction). All patients underwent reduction corporoplasty with prosthesis replacements consisting of controlled expansion IPPs. 3 patients had undergone previous device replacements because of intact cycling but unstable and unusable IPP devices, whereas 2 had a single previous device insertion. Mean age at revision was 67 years. Median IPP duration was 17 years. Median number of previous IPP surgeries was 3. All patients reported IPP stability and satisfaction after revision (median follow-up = 6 months). Conclusions: Proximal corporal deformities could account for IPP failure. This condition can be under-recognized as observed in the present cases of multiple revisions with a normally cycling device that was not usable. Proper recognition of this problem allows the opportunity for surgical correction with reduction corporoplasty. Rajih E, Burnett AL. Penile Wobble Effect: Proximal Corporal Deformities as a Cause of Penile Prosthesis Failure. Sex Med 2018;X:XXX–XXX.",
keywords = "Corpora Cavernosa, Corporoplasty, Erectile Dysfunction, Tunica Albuginea",
author = "Emad Rajih and Arthur Burnett",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.esxm.2018.04.004",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Sexual Medicine",
issn = "2050-1161",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Penile Wobble Effect

T2 - Proximal Corporal Deformities as a Cause of Penile Prosthesis Failure

AU - Rajih, Emad

AU - Burnett, Arthur

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Introduction: Penile structural defects can contribute toward penile prosthesis (PP) surgical complications and suboptimal outcomes. Despite modern improvements in techniques of inflatable PP (IPP) surgeries, suboptimal outcomes arise secondary to unrecognized proximal corporal abnormalities. Aim: To describe a new observation of IPP failure (wobbly penis) secondary to proximal corporal deformities. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Johns Hopkins institutional database of patients who had IPP surgery from May 2006 to March 2017. All cases requiring surgical revisions secondary to proximal corporal deformities were identified. Exclusion criteria included patients who had incidentally discovered proximal corporal deformities intraoperatively or were documented preoperatively to have had a corporal defect. Main Outcome Measures: Successful reimplantation of a functionally intact PP device. Results: On clinical grounds, we identified 5 patients with properly cycling but unstable prosthetic devices that were associated with proximal corporal dilatation (proximally from the penoscrotal junction). All patients underwent reduction corporoplasty with prosthesis replacements consisting of controlled expansion IPPs. 3 patients had undergone previous device replacements because of intact cycling but unstable and unusable IPP devices, whereas 2 had a single previous device insertion. Mean age at revision was 67 years. Median IPP duration was 17 years. Median number of previous IPP surgeries was 3. All patients reported IPP stability and satisfaction after revision (median follow-up = 6 months). Conclusions: Proximal corporal deformities could account for IPP failure. This condition can be under-recognized as observed in the present cases of multiple revisions with a normally cycling device that was not usable. Proper recognition of this problem allows the opportunity for surgical correction with reduction corporoplasty. Rajih E, Burnett AL. Penile Wobble Effect: Proximal Corporal Deformities as a Cause of Penile Prosthesis Failure. Sex Med 2018;X:XXX–XXX.

AB - Introduction: Penile structural defects can contribute toward penile prosthesis (PP) surgical complications and suboptimal outcomes. Despite modern improvements in techniques of inflatable PP (IPP) surgeries, suboptimal outcomes arise secondary to unrecognized proximal corporal abnormalities. Aim: To describe a new observation of IPP failure (wobbly penis) secondary to proximal corporal deformities. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Johns Hopkins institutional database of patients who had IPP surgery from May 2006 to March 2017. All cases requiring surgical revisions secondary to proximal corporal deformities were identified. Exclusion criteria included patients who had incidentally discovered proximal corporal deformities intraoperatively or were documented preoperatively to have had a corporal defect. Main Outcome Measures: Successful reimplantation of a functionally intact PP device. Results: On clinical grounds, we identified 5 patients with properly cycling but unstable prosthetic devices that were associated with proximal corporal dilatation (proximally from the penoscrotal junction). All patients underwent reduction corporoplasty with prosthesis replacements consisting of controlled expansion IPPs. 3 patients had undergone previous device replacements because of intact cycling but unstable and unusable IPP devices, whereas 2 had a single previous device insertion. Mean age at revision was 67 years. Median IPP duration was 17 years. Median number of previous IPP surgeries was 3. All patients reported IPP stability and satisfaction after revision (median follow-up = 6 months). Conclusions: Proximal corporal deformities could account for IPP failure. This condition can be under-recognized as observed in the present cases of multiple revisions with a normally cycling device that was not usable. Proper recognition of this problem allows the opportunity for surgical correction with reduction corporoplasty. Rajih E, Burnett AL. Penile Wobble Effect: Proximal Corporal Deformities as a Cause of Penile Prosthesis Failure. Sex Med 2018;X:XXX–XXX.

KW - Corpora Cavernosa

KW - Corporoplasty

KW - Erectile Dysfunction

KW - Tunica Albuginea

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046806566&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85046806566&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.esxm.2018.04.004

DO - 10.1016/j.esxm.2018.04.004

M3 - Article

C2 - 29730134

AN - SCOPUS:85046806566

JO - Sexual Medicine

JF - Sexual Medicine

SN - 2050-1161

ER -