Current Urology Reports

, Volume 9, Issue 6, pp 483–486

Increasing size with penile implants



Penile prosthesis implantation is suitable treatment for men with erectile dysfunction when nonsurgical treatment options fail or are otherwise unsatisfactory. Three-piece inflatable penile prostheses closely approach the ideal of producing normal penile flaccidity and erection. Nevertheless, even in men with normal corpora cavernosa, many report their prosthetic erection is shorter than their former natural erection. This is due to the lack of glans tumescence and the use of penile cylinders, which only expand in girth. Using girth-and length-expanding cylinders can decrease the loss of penile length frequently seen with prosthesis implantation. Some penile prosthesis recipients have abnormal corpora following radical prostatectomy or after removal of an infected penile prosthesis, or as the result of Peyronie’s disease, obesity, or ischemic priapism. In these men with abnormal corpora, associated penile-lengthening procedures can be combined with penile prosthesis implantation. However, experience is limited with these combined procedures.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Montague DK: Penile prosthesis implantation: size matters. Eur Urol 2007, 51:887–888.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deveci S, Martin D, Parker M, Mulhall JP: Penile length alterations following penile prosthesis surgery. Eur Urol 2007, 51:1128–1131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gontero P, Galzerano M, Bartoletti R, et al.: New insights into the pathogenesis of penile shortening after radical prostatectomy and the role of postoperative sexual function. J Urol 2007, 178:602–607.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mulhall JP: Penile length changes after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int, 2005, 96:472–474.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Savoie M, Kim SS, Soloway MS: A prospective study measuring penile length in men treated with radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 2003, 169:1462–1464.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mulhall JP, Schiff J, Guhring P: An analysis of the natural history of Peyronie’s disease. J Urol 2006, 175:2115–2118.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Montague DK, Angermeier KW, Lakin MM, Ingleright BJ: AMS 3-piece inflatable penile prosthesis implantation in men with Peyronie’s disease: comparison of CX and Ultrex cylinders. J Urol 1996, 156:1633–1635.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carbone DJ Jr, Daitch JA, Angermeier KW, et al.: Management of severe corporeal fibrosis with implantation of prosthesis via a transverse scrotal approach. J Urol 1998, 159:125–127.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Borsellino A, Spagnoli A, Vallasciani S, et al.: Surgical approach to concealed penis: technical refinements and outcome. Urology 2007, 69:1195–1198.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wessells H, Lue TF, McAninch JW: Penile length in the flaccid and erect states: guidelines for penile augmentation. J Urol 1996, 156:995–997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schonfeld WA, Beebe GW: Normal growth and variation in the male genitalia from birth to maturity. J Urol 1942, 48:759–777.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Santucci RA, Berger RE: “Finger trap” penile lengthening after partial penectomy by multiple incisions in the tunica albuginea. J Urol 1995, 154:530–532.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Knoll LD, Fisher J, Benson RC Jr, et al.: Treatment of penile fibrosis with prosthetic implantation and flap advancement with tissue debulking. J Urol 1996, 156:394–397.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lue TF, El-Sakka AI: Lengthening shortened penis caused by Peyronie’s disease using circular venous grafting and daily stretching with a vacuum erection device. J Urol 1999, 161:1141–1144.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alter GJ: Penile enlargement surgery. Tech Urol 1998, 4:70–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shaeer O, Shaeer K, el-Sebaie A: Minimizing the losses in penile lengthening: “V-Y half-skin half-fat advancement flap” and “T-closure” combined with severing the suspensory ligament. J Sex Med 2006, 3:155–160.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Perovic SV, Djordjevic ML: Penile lengthening. BJU Int 2000, 86:1028–1033.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Perovic SV, Djordjevic ML: The penile disassembly technique in the surgical treatment of Peyronie’s disease. BJU Int 2001, 88:731–738.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Montague DK, Lakin MM: Early experience with the controlled girth and length expanding cylinder of the American Medical Systems Ultrex penile prosthesis. J Urol 1992, 148:1444–1446.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wilson SK, Cleves MA, Delk JR 2nd: Ultrex cylinders: problems with uncontrolled lengthening (the S-shaped deformity). J Urol 1996, 155:135–137.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Milbank AJ, Montague DK, Angermeier KW, et al.: Mechanical failure of the American Medical Systems Ultrex inflatable penile prosthesis: before and after 1993 structural modification. J Urol 2002, 167:2502–2506.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Montague DK, Angermeier KW: Cylinder sizing: less is more. Int J Impot Res 2003, 15(Suppl 5):S132–S133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Cleveland ClinicClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations