An unexpected event during revision penile prosthesis: Evidence base decision making
Keywords:
Penile prosthesis, revisionAbstract
This gentleman was implanted with Inflatable Penile Prosthesis (IPP) in 2015. After surgery, there is no complication but he felt pain when fully inflated IPP. Last year implant was completely malfunction without any sign of infection. He needed to revise IPP. Intra-op findings were one cylinder tubing was cut and ligated with silk, minimal pus at reservoir area. Revision procedure was proceeded former implant was removed, Corporal bodies were washout. New implant placed and reservoir placement at new infrapubic area. On follow up there is no infection. IPP worked well with satisfied girth and rigidity. This report is aim to present an unusual event during revision procedure and evidence base decision making to achieve surgical outcome.
References
Serefoglu EC, Mandava SH, Gokce A, Chouhan JD, Wilson SK, Hellstrom WJ. Long-term revision rate due to infection in hydrophilic-coated inflatable penile prostheses: 11-year follow-up. J Sex Med 2012;9:2182-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02830.x. Epub 2012 Jul 3.
Carson CC 3rd, Mulcahy JJ, Harsch MR. Longterm infection outcomes after original antibiotic impregnated inflatable penile prosthesis implants: up to 7.7 years of follow up. J Urol 2011;185:614-8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.094. Epub 2010 Dec 18.
Lewis RW. Long-term results of penile prosthetic implants. Urol Clin North Am 1995;22:847-856
JJ Mulcahy. Treatment alternatives for the infected penile implant. Int J Impot Res 2003;15 Suppl 5:S147-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3901092.
Kaufman JM, Kaufman JL, Borges FD. Immediate salvage procedure for infected penile prosthesis.
J Urol 1998;159:816-818.
Lao M, Graydon RJ, Bieniek JM. Salvage penile prosthetic surgery utilizing temporary malleable implants. Transl Androl Urol 2017;6 (suppl 5): S806-S812. Doi:10.21037/tau.2017. 05.12.
