176 Peyronie's Disease Does Not Significantly Impact Patient-Reported Outcomes After Penile Prosthesis Implantation
Authors: Ziegelmann M. , Langbo W. , Bajic P. , Levine L. 
Published: April 2022

Introduction

Penile prosthesis (PP) implantation with concurrent straightening maneuvers is the gold standard surgical therapy for men with Peyronie's Disease (PD) and concurrent medication-refractory ED. Satisfaction rates exceed 80-90% in modern series. PD is characterized by other bothersome effects on penile morphology (i.e. penile shortening) that also negatively impact patient satisfaction with PP. We hypothesized that men with both PD+ED would report lower overall satisfaction with PP implantation compared to those with ED alone.

Objective

To compare patient outcomes in a cohort of patients undergoing PP implantation for ED with and without concurrent PD.

Methods

We identified all patients who underwent PP implantation by a single surgeon between May 2012 and August 2019 (n=354). A retrospective chart review was performed to evaluate pertinent clinical demographics and surgical outcomes. A survey was mailed to all patients in July 2019. This included validated ED questionnaires (IIEF, EDITS, and QOLSP) and clinician-derived questions to evaluate subjective outcomes. Survey results were compared between those patients with and without a history of PD, using two-sample student t- and chi-squared tests (p-value &lt; 0.05 considered significant).

Results

79 patients completed the survey (response rate 22%), including 38 (48%) with PD+ED. Mean survey follow-up duration was 45.5 (SD 19.5) months. There was no significant difference in patient demographics amongst those patients who did and did not respond to the survey. Amongst survey respondents, the mean preoperative IIEF-EF score was significantly higher for patients with PD+ED (10.2; SD 9.1) compared to those with ED alone (3.9; SD 5.0, p=0.003). Respondents with a history of both PD+ED were also less likely to have previously used oral therapy and intracavernosal injection to treat ED prior to PP implantation (p&lt;0.009). For those respondents with PD+ED, mean preoperative curvature was 59O (SD 43). Adjunctive straightening maneuvers at the time of PP implantation included manual modeling (87%), plication (5%), and incision/grafting (50%). Overall, device infection occurred in 4/79 patients (5%), and mechanical malfunction occurred in 3/79 (4%). 87% of all survey respondents felt their ED was “very much” or “much” improved. 80% stated they would recommend PP to a friend. 60% reported postoperative penile length loss, but only 35% were “dissatisfied” with current length and only 20% were dissatisfied with penile girth. In those with PD+ED, 91% were satisfied with the degree of penile straightening. There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes pertaining to length, girth, and overall satisfaction between those with and without PD. The mean follow-up IIEF-EF was 27.4 (SD 5.7), mean EDITS was 18 (SD 8), and mean QOLSP was 55 (SD 15). Once again, there was no significant difference in these outcomes based on the presence of PD.

Conclusions

PP results in high rates of patient satisfaction. The presence of concurrent PD, even amongst those requiring adjunctive maneuvers, does not appear to significantly impact patient outcomes. While there are inherent limitations to a survey-based study including reporter bias, these results support the use of PP and concurrent straightening as an excellent treatment option for men with PD and ED.

Disclosure

Yes, this is sponsored by industry/sponsor: This project was funded by an investigator-initiated grant from Coloplast Corporation.

Clarification: Industry funding only - investigator initiated and executed study

Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Coloplast Corporation (Dr. Laurence Levine - consultant); Boston Scientific (Dr. Laurence Levine - Consultant)