Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Distal Extrusion and Impending Cylinder Erosion of the Penile Prosthesis: a Clinical Challenge for the Urologist

  • Male and Female Surgical Interventions (AL Burnett and CC Carson III, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Sexual Health Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Distal extrusion with impending cylinder erosion through the distal corpus cavernosum is a significant complication of penile prosthesis surgery. Surgical repair is indicated to prevent cylinder perforation or erosion through the skin, which leads to infection and requires removal of all prosthesis components. The underlying cause is typically unrecognized tunical perforation during surgery, aggressive distal dilation, oversized cylinders, or repeated trauma. Extrusion is more common in patients with microangiopathy, prior radiation, corporal fibrosis, or decreased distal sensation. The two most prevalent methods for repair are distal corporoplasty or windsock graft reconstruction. Distal corporoplasty has been demonstrated to have superior outcomes to windsock grafts and is the method of repair that these authors favor. The goal of this review is to provide a background on distal penile prosthesis extrusion, along with potential treatment approaches, so that the surgeon may be familiar with this seemingly difficult, albeit rare, complication of penile prosthesis surgery.

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

  1. GE B. Beheri’s operation for treatment of impotence-observations on 125 cases. Kasr el Aini J Surg. 1960;1(360):6.

    Google Scholar 

  2. GE B. The problem of impotence solved by a new surgical operation. Kasr el Aini J Surg. 1960;1:50.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Scott FB, Bradley WE, Timm GW. Management of erectile impotence. Use of implantable inflatable prosthesis. Urology. 1973;2(1):80–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Thomas E, Keane SDGJ. Glenn’s Urologic Surgery. 8th ed. 2015: Wolters Kluwer Health. 992

  5. Henry GD, Laborde E. A review of surgical techniques for impending distal erosion and intraoperative penile implant complications: part 2 of a three-part review series on penile prosthetic surgery. J Sex Med. 2012;9(3):927–36. This article elaborates on risk factors for distal cylinder extrusion in addition to offering a technique for repair.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Trost L et al. History, Contemporary Outcomes, and Future of Penile Prostheses: A Review of the Literature. Sexual Med Rev. 2015;1(3):150–63. This study highlights background information on inflatable penile prostheses. Advances in design that lower the rates of malfunction or failure are described.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Carson CC, Noh CH. Distal penile prosthesis extrusion: treatment with distal corporoplasty or Gortex windsock reinforcement. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14(2):81–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Martinez-Salamanca JI et al. Penile prosthesis surgery in patients with corporal fibrosis: a state of the art review. J Sex Med. 2011;8(7):1880–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Complications of Urologic Surgery and Practice: Diagnosis, Prevention, and Management. First ed, ed. K.R. Loughlin. 2007: CRC Press. 576

  10. Hsu GL et al. Anatomy and strength of the tunica albuginea: its relevance to penile prosthesis extrusion. J Urol. 1994;151(5):1205–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Alter GJ et al. Use of a prefabricated tunica vaginalis fascia flap to reconstruct the tunica albuginea after recurrent penile prosthesis extrusion. J Urol. 1997;159(1):128–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Shaeer O. Management of distal extrusion of penile prosthesis: partial disassembly and tip reinforcement by double breasting or grafting. J Sex Med. 2008;5(5):1257–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mulcahy JJ. Distal corporoplasty for lateral extrusion of penile prosthesis cylinders. J Urol. 1999;161(1):193–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hellstrom WJ, Reddy S. Application of pericardial graft in the surgical management of Peyronie’s disease. J Urol. 2001;163(5):1445–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Pathak AS et al. Use of rectus fascia graft for corporeal reconstruction during placement of penile implant. Urology. 2005;65(6):1198–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Knoll LD. Use of porcine small intestinal submucosal graft in the surgical management of tunical deficiencies with penile prosthetic surgery. Urology. 2002;59(5):758–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Landman J, Bar-Chama N. Initial experience with processed human cadaveric allograft skin for reconstruction of the corpus cavernosum in repair of distal extrusion of a penile prosthesis. Urology. 1999;53(6):1222–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Palese MA, Burnett AL. Corporoplasty using pericardium allograft (tutoplast) with complex penile prosthesis surgery. Urology. 2001;58(6):1049–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Shindel AW et al. Transglanular repair of impending penile prosthetic cylinder extrusion. J Sex Med. 2010;7(8):2884–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Smith CP, Kraus SR, Boone TB. Management of impending penile prosthesis erosion with a polytetrafluoroethylene distal wind sock graft. J Urol. 1998;160(6 Pt 1):2037–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Egydio PH, Kuehhas FE. Distal penile shaft reconstruction and reinforcement: the “double-windsocks” technique. J Sex Med. 2013;10(10):2571–8. This study describes outcomes of the double windsocks method of repair, including complications and durability.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jarow JP. Risk factors for penile prosthetic infection. J Urol. 1996;156(2 Pt 1):402–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Thomalla JV et al. Infectious complications of penile prosthetic implants. J Urol. 1987;138(1):65–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

    Troy Sukhu, Culley C. Carson & Robert M. Coward

Authors
  1. Troy Sukhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Culley C. Carson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert M. Coward
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Troy Sukhu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

TS and CCC declare that they have no conflicts of interest. RMC reports consulting fees from Coloplast and American Medical Systems, outside the submitted work.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

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

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Male and Female Surgical Interventions

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sukhu, T., Carson, C.C. & Coward, R.M. Distal Extrusion and Impending Cylinder Erosion of the Penile Prosthesis: a Clinical Challenge for the Urologist. Curr Sex Health Rep 8, 86–90 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-016-0073-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-016-0073-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation