Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Translating Penile Erectile Hydraulics to Clinical Application in Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Implant

  • Preclinical and Psychophysiology (F Guarraci and L Marson, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Sexual Health Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

To review the concept of erectile hydraulics and the scientific advances in modern inflatable penile prosthesis implant.

Recent Findings

Penile erection requires the presence of nitric oxide, relaxation of the penile vasculature, and engorgement of corpora cavernosa sinusoids. It is generally accepted that the development of erectile dysfunction is frequently attributed to both psychogenic factors as well as physiological alterations in neural, vascular, hormonal and endothelial function. Despite the advent of oral and intracavernosal erectile drugs, penile prosthesis implant remains a relevant and desired option as many men became refractory to medical therapy and/or seek a more effective and permanent solution.

Summary

The inflatable penile prosthesis is considered a superior option to malleable prosthesis as it closely replicates a normal penile erection. While the ideal penile prosthesis is probably yet to be developed, scientific advances in prosthesis design, device technology, and surgical techniques have made the penile prosthesis more natural, durable and reliable device.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Lue TF, Giuliano F, Montorsi F, et al. Summary of the recommendations on sexual dysfunctions in men. J Sex Med. 2004 Jul;1(1):6–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hartmann U. Sigmund Freud and his impact on our understanding of male sexual dysfunction. J Sex Med. 2009;6(8):2332–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lue TF, Zeineh SJ, Schmidt RA, Tanagho EA. Neuroanatomy of penile erection: its relevance to iatrogenic impotent. J Urol. 1984;131(2):273–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Aboseif SR, Lue TF. Hemodynamics of penile erection. Urol Clin North Am. 1988;15(1):1–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chung E, De Young L, Brock GB. Investigative models in erectile dysfunction: a state-of-the-art review of current animal models. J Sex Med. 2011;8(121):3291–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lue TF. Erectile dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1802–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Andersson KE, Wagner G. Physiology of penile erection. Physiol Rev. 1995;75:191–236.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Yiee JH, Baskin LS. Penile embryology and anatomy. ScientificWorldJournal. 2010;10:1174–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Moscovici J, Galinier P, Hammoudi S, Lefebvre D, Juricic M, Vaysse P. Contribution to the study of the venous vasculature of the penis. Surg Radiol Anat. 1999;21:193–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dean RC, Lue TF. Physiology of penile erection and pathophysiology of erectile dysfunction. Urol Clin North Am. 2005;32(4):379-v.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Meldrum DR, Burnett AL, Dorey G, Esposito K, Ignarro LJ. Erectile hydraulics: maximizing inflow while minimizing outflow. J Sex Med. 2014;11:1208–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Andersson KE. Pharmacology of penile erection. Pharmacol Rev. 2001;53:417–50.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lavoisier O, Courtois F, Barres D, Blanchard M. Correlation between intracavernous pressure and contraction of ischiocavernosus muscle in man. J Urol. 1986;136:936–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bosch RJ, Benard F, Aboseif SR, et al. Penile detumescence: characterization of three phases. J Urol. 1991;146:867–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lue TF, Takamura T, Schmidt RA, et al. Hemodynamics of erection in the monkey. J Urol. 1983;130:1237–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. de Saenz Tejada I, Angulo J, Sellek S, et al. Pathophysiology of erectile dysfunction. J Sex Med. 2005;2:26–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. •• Chung E. Penile prosthesis implant: scientific advances and technological innovations over the last four decades. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6(1):37–45. This study provides a comprehensive review on the advances of malleable and inflatable penile prosthesis implant in the last 4 decades

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Gee WF. A history of surgical treatment of impotence. Urology. 1975;5:401–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Frumkin AP. Reconstruction of the male genitalia. Am Rev Soviet Med. 1944;2:14–7.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Goodwin WE, Scott WW. Phalloplasty. J Urol. 1952;68(6):903–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Beheri GE. Surgical treatment of impotence. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1966;38(2):92–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lash H. Silicone implant for impotence. J Urol. 1968;100(5):709–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pearman RO. Treatment of organic impotence by implantation of a penile prosthesis. J Urol. 1967;97(4):716–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Scott FB, Bradley WE, Timm GW. Management of erectile impotence: use of implantable inflatable prosthesis. Urology. 1973;2:80–2. (*)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Randrup ER. Clinical experience with 180 inflatable penile prostheses. South Med J. 1995;88(1):47–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Riehmann M, Gasser TC, Bruskewitz RC. The Hydroflex penile prosthesis: a test case for the introduction of new urological technology. J Urol. 1993;149(5 Pt 2):1304–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wilson SK, Cleves M, Delk 2nd JR. Long-term results with Hydroflex and Dynaflex penile prostheses: device survival comparison to multicomponent inflatables. J Urol. 1996;155(5):1621–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Levine LA, Estrada CR, Morgentaler A. Mechanical reliability and safety of, and patient satisfaction with, the Ambicor inflatable penile prosthesis: results of a 2 center study. J Urol. 2001;166:932–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Timm GW, Bradley WF, Scott FB. Experimental evaluation of an implantable externally controllable urinary sphincter. Investig Urol. 1974;11:326–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Scott FB, Bradley WE, Timm GW. Treatment of urinary incontinence by implantable prosthetic sphincter. Urology. 1973;1:252–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Henry GD. Historical review of penile prosthesis design and surgical techniques: part 1 of a three-part review series on penile prosthetic surgery. J Sex Med. 2009;6(3):675–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wilson SK, Delk 2nd JR. Historical advances in penile prostheses. Int J Impot Res. 2000;12(4):S101–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Data on file at AMS database. www.AmericanMedicalSystems.com

  34. Salem EA, Wilson SK, Neeb A, Delk JR, Cleves MA. Mechanical reliability of AMS 700 CX improved by parylene coating. J Sex Med. 2009;6(9):2615–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Merrill DC, Javaheri P. Mentor inflatable penile prosthesis. Preliminary clinical results in 30 patients. Urology. 1984;23(5 Spec No):72–4.

  36. Hakky T, Ferguson D, Spiess PE, et al. Thre-dimensional mapping and comparative analysis of the distal human corpus cavernosum and the inflatable penile prosthesis. Asian J Androl. 2013;15:567–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Mulcany JJ. Use of CX cylinders in association with AMS700 inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol. 1988;140(6):1420–1.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Negro CL, Paradiso M, Rocca A, Bardari F. Implantation of AMS 700 LGX penile prosthesis preserves penile length without the need for penile lengthening procedures. Asian J Androl. 2016;18(1):114–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. McKim SE, Carson 3rd CC. AMS 700 inflatable penile prosthesis with InhibiZone. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2010;7(3):311–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Carson 3rd CC. Efficacy of antibiotic impregnation of inflatable penile prostheses in decreasing infection in original implants. J Urol. 2004;171:1661–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Wolter CE, Hellstrom WJ. The hydrophilic-coated inflatable penile prosthesis: 1-year experience. J Sex Med. 2004;1:221–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ziegelmann MJ, Viers BR, Lomas DJ, Westerman ME, Trost LW. Ectopic penile prosthesis reservoir placement: an anatomic cadaver model of the high submuscular technique. J Sex Med. 2016;13(9):1425–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Chung PH, Morey AF, Tausch TJ, Simhan J, Scott JF. High submuscular placement of urologic prosthesis balloons and reservoirs: 2-year experience and patient reported outcomes. Urology. 2014;84:1535–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Wilson SK, Henry GD, Delk Jr JR, Cleves MA. The Mentor alpha 1 penile prosthesis with reservoir lock-out valve: effective prevention of auto-inflation with improved capability for ectopic reservoir placement. J Urol. 2002;168:1475–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Knoll LD, Henry G, Culkin D, et al. Physician and patient satisfaction with the new AMS 700 momentary squeeze inflatable penile prosthesis. J Sex Med. 2009;6:1773–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Shaw T, Garber BB. Coloplast titan inflatable penile prosthesis with one-touch release pump: review of 100 cases and comparison with genesis pump. J Sex Med. 2011;8(1):310–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ohl DA, Brock G, Ralph D, et al. Prospective evaluation of patient satisfaction, and surgeon and patient trainer assessment of the Coloplast titan one touch release three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis. J Sex Med. 2012;9(9):2467–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. • Pastuszak AW, Lentz AC, Farooq A, Jones L, Bella AJ. Technological improvements in three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis design over the past 40 years. J Sex Med. 2015;12(7):415–21. This study highlights technological advances in three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis over the last 40 years

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Boston Scientific/AMS and Coloplast Corporations for sharing their database.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Eric Chung

  2. AndroUrology Centre, St Andrew’s War Memorial Hospital, Suite 3, 530 Boundary St, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia

    Eric Chung

Authors
  1. Eric Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric Chung.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Eric Chung has received honorarium from Boston Scientific and Coloplast Corporation.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the author.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Preclinical and Psychophysiology

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chung, E. Translating Penile Erectile Hydraulics to Clinical Application in Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Implant. Curr Sex Health Rep 9, 84–89 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-017-0107-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-017-0107-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation