Cargando…
Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate surgical outcome, complications, and patients satisfaction with the Tube® (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina) malleable penile prosthesis in diabetic and non-diabetic patients with refractory erectile dysfunction (ED). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 128 eligible patients who...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5122751/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27900222 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.07.002 |
_version_ | 1782469643060903936 |
---|---|
author | Mohamed, Elnisr Rashed Hammady, Ahmed Rashed Eldahshoury, Mohamed Zaki Elsharkawi, Ahmed Mamdouh Riad, Ahmed Mahmoud Elmogazy, Hazem Mohamed Hussien, Mohamed Mostafa Gamal, Wael Mohamed |
author_facet | Mohamed, Elnisr Rashed Hammady, Ahmed Rashed Eldahshoury, Mohamed Zaki Elsharkawi, Ahmed Mamdouh Riad, Ahmed Mahmoud Elmogazy, Hazem Mohamed Hussien, Mohamed Mostafa Gamal, Wael Mohamed |
author_sort | Mohamed, Elnisr Rashed |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate surgical outcome, complications, and patients satisfaction with the Tube® (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina) malleable penile prosthesis in diabetic and non-diabetic patients with refractory erectile dysfunction (ED). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 128 eligible patients who received Tube malleable penile prostheses at our institute between September 2008 and October 2015 were reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 128 patients, who received Tube penile prostheses at our institute, 53 were diabetics and 75 were non-diabetics. Both groups of patients were comparable for mean age, education level, marital status, hospital stay, time to commencing sexual intercourse, and median follow-up. Complications included: inter-corporeal septal perforation (2.3%), glanular urethral injury (1.5%), acute urinary retention (3.9%), superficial wound infection (7%), penile discomfort (9.4%), and penile prostheses infection (5.5%). Moreover, 3.9% developed atrophy of the cavernosal tissue, 5.5% experienced bad cosmesis, 6.3% experienced ejaculatory disorders, and 2.3% developed bladder calculi. In all, 13 prostheses (9.4%) were removed, seven of them due to infection, three on the patients’ demand and three due to mechanical failure. The satisfaction rates with the prostheses were 77.3% and 79.4% in the diabetic and non-diabetic patients, respectively; with an overall satisfaction rate of 78.5%. There was no significant difference in the complication rate or prostheses infection between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. CONCLUSION: Tube malleable penile prostheses are associated with low complication and high satisfaction rates. There was no significant difference in the complication rate or prostheses infection between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. A prospective comparative study with a large number of patients is recommended. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5122751 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51227512016-11-29 Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction Mohamed, Elnisr Rashed Hammady, Ahmed Rashed Eldahshoury, Mohamed Zaki Elsharkawi, Ahmed Mamdouh Riad, Ahmed Mahmoud Elmogazy, Hazem Mohamed Hussien, Mohamed Mostafa Gamal, Wael Mohamed Arab J Urol Original Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate surgical outcome, complications, and patients satisfaction with the Tube® (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina) malleable penile prosthesis in diabetic and non-diabetic patients with refractory erectile dysfunction (ED). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 128 eligible patients who received Tube malleable penile prostheses at our institute between September 2008 and October 2015 were reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 128 patients, who received Tube penile prostheses at our institute, 53 were diabetics and 75 were non-diabetics. Both groups of patients were comparable for mean age, education level, marital status, hospital stay, time to commencing sexual intercourse, and median follow-up. Complications included: inter-corporeal septal perforation (2.3%), glanular urethral injury (1.5%), acute urinary retention (3.9%), superficial wound infection (7%), penile discomfort (9.4%), and penile prostheses infection (5.5%). Moreover, 3.9% developed atrophy of the cavernosal tissue, 5.5% experienced bad cosmesis, 6.3% experienced ejaculatory disorders, and 2.3% developed bladder calculi. In all, 13 prostheses (9.4%) were removed, seven of them due to infection, three on the patients’ demand and three due to mechanical failure. The satisfaction rates with the prostheses were 77.3% and 79.4% in the diabetic and non-diabetic patients, respectively; with an overall satisfaction rate of 78.5%. There was no significant difference in the complication rate or prostheses infection between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. CONCLUSION: Tube malleable penile prostheses are associated with low complication and high satisfaction rates. There was no significant difference in the complication rate or prostheses infection between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. A prospective comparative study with a large number of patients is recommended. Elsevier 2016-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5122751/ /pubmed/27900222 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.07.002 Text en © 2016 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Arab Association of Urology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Mohamed, Elnisr Rashed Hammady, Ahmed Rashed Eldahshoury, Mohamed Zaki Elsharkawi, Ahmed Mamdouh Riad, Ahmed Mahmoud Elmogazy, Hazem Mohamed Hussien, Mohamed Mostafa Gamal, Wael Mohamed Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction |
title | Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction |
title_full | Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction |
title_fullStr | Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction |
title_full_unstemmed | Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction |
title_short | Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction |
title_sort | surgical outcomes and complications of tube® (promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5122751/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27900222 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.07.002 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mohamedelnisrrashed surgicaloutcomesandcomplicationsoftubepromedonmalleablepenileprosthesesindiabeticversusnondiabeticpatientswitherectiledysfunction AT hammadyahmedrashed surgicaloutcomesandcomplicationsoftubepromedonmalleablepenileprosthesesindiabeticversusnondiabeticpatientswitherectiledysfunction AT eldahshourymohamedzaki surgicaloutcomesandcomplicationsoftubepromedonmalleablepenileprosthesesindiabeticversusnondiabeticpatientswitherectiledysfunction AT elsharkawiahmedmamdouh surgicaloutcomesandcomplicationsoftubepromedonmalleablepenileprosthesesindiabeticversusnondiabeticpatientswitherectiledysfunction AT riadahmedmahmoud surgicaloutcomesandcomplicationsoftubepromedonmalleablepenileprosthesesindiabeticversusnondiabeticpatientswitherectiledysfunction AT elmogazyhazemmohamed surgicaloutcomesandcomplicationsoftubepromedonmalleablepenileprosthesesindiabeticversusnondiabeticpatientswitherectiledysfunction AT hussienmohamedmostafa surgicaloutcomesandcomplicationsoftubepromedonmalleablepenileprosthesesindiabeticversusnondiabeticpatientswitherectiledysfunction AT gamalwaelmohamed surgicaloutcomesandcomplicationsoftubepromedonmalleablepenileprosthesesindiabeticversusnondiabeticpatientswitherectiledysfunction |