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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mohamed, Elnisr Rashed, Hammady, Ahmed Rashed, Eldahshoury, Mohamed Zaki, Elsharkawi, Ahmed Mamdouh, Riad, Ahmed Mahmoud, Elmogazy, Hazem Mohamed, Hussien, Mohamed Mostafa, Gamal, Wael Mohamed
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