Indian Journal of Surgery

, Volume 80, Issue 1, pp 19–23 | Cite as

Sexuality in Surgically Treated Carcinoma Penis Patients and Their Partners

  • Gajanan S. Bhat
  • Girish Nelivigi
  • Vijayakumar Barude
  • Anuradha Shastry
Original Article

Abstract

Most common treatment offered to carcinoma penis patients is surgery. This results in not only mutilation of the genitals but also affects their sexuality. The treating physician fails to address the issue due to the paucity of the data in this regard. Hence, we decided to evaluate sexuality in these patients after surgical treatment for penile cancer. Most of the times, their partners also face problems of sex and sexuality, regarding which there is no literature. Hence, we decided to include their partners also in the study. We retrieved records of the patients who underwent surgical treatment for carcinoma penis at our institute. After obtaining ethical committee approval, they were invited along with their partners for personal interview. After obtaining written informed consent from each of them, they were administered sexual functioning questionnaire (SFQ). Sexuality was evaluated based on the scores obtained. Performance anxiety was reported by majority of these patients. Their sexual interest, arousal and desire remained almost intact with reduction in satisfaction more so in total penectomised patients. Though the partners had accepted the global reduction in sexuality as their fate, their interpersonal relationship remained little disturbed. The study reveals that sexuality is more than the sexual intercourse alone. Proper pre-operative counselling of these patients and their partners by the treating urologist helps better post-treatment adjustment with regards to sexuality in these patients as well as their partners.

Keywords

Sexuality Carcinoma penis Total penectomy Partial penectomy 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical committee approval was obtained for evaluation of sexuality concerns post-surgery in these patients and their partners. After obtaining the written informed consent, the interview was conducted in the vernacular of the patients and their partners using sexual functioning questionnaire (SFQ).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Hakenberg OW, Comperat EM, Minhas S, Necchi A, Protzel C, Watkin N (2015) EAU guidelines on penile cancer: 2014 update. Eur Urol 67:142–150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lewis L (1931) Young's radical operation for the cure of cancer of the penis: a report of 34 cases. J Urol 26:295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McDougal WS, Kirschner FK, Edwards RH, Killion LT (1986) Treatment of carcinoma of the penis: the case for primary lymphadenectomy. J Urol 136:38–41CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pizzocaro G, Piva L, Bandieramonte G, Tana S (1997) Up-to-date management of carcinoma of the penis. Eur Urol 32:5–15PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Opjordsmoen S, Fossa SD (1994) Quality of life in patients treated for penile cancer. A follow-up study. Br J Urol 74:652–657CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gabbard GO (2001) Mind and brain in psychiatric treatment. In: Gabbard GO (ed) Treatments of psychiatric disorders, 3rd edn. American Psychiatric Press, Washington (DC), pp. 3–20Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kumari R (1995) Rural female adolescence: Indian scenario. Soc Change 25:177–188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    World Health Organization (2002) WHO (2006a): Defining sexual health: report of a technical consultation on sexual health: 28–31Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Syrjala KL, Schroeder TC, Abrams JR, Atkins TZ, Sanders JE, Brown W, et al. (2000) Sexual function measurement and outcomes in cancer survivors and matched controls. J Sex Res. 37:213–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D’Ancona CA, Botega NJ, Demoreas C, Lavoura NS, Santos JK, Rodrigues N, et al. (1997) Quality of life after partial penectomy for penile carcinoma. Urology. 50:593–596CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ficarra V, Mofferdin A, D’Amico A, Zanon G, Schiavone D, Malossini G, et al. (1999) Comparison of the quality of life of patients treated by surgery or radiotherapy in epidermoid cancer of the penis. Prog Urol. 9:715–720PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Romero FR, Romero KR, Mattos MA, Garcia CR, Fernandes Rde C, Perez MD (2005) Sexual function after partial penectomy for penile cancer. Urology. 66:1292–1295CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sedigh O, Falcone M, Timpano M, Preto M, Oderda M, Kuehhas F, et al. (2015) Sexual function after surgical treatment for penile cancer: which organ sparing approach gives the best results? Can Urol Assoc J. 9:7–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kieffer JM, Diaiadiningrat RS, van Muilekom EA, Graafland NM, Horenblas S, Aaronson NK (2014) Quality of life for patients treated for penile cancer. J Urol. 192(4):1105–1110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Delaunay B, Soh PN, Delannes M, Riou O, Malavaud B, Moreno F, et al. (2014) Brachytherapy for penile cancer: efficacy and impact on sexual function. Brachytherapy 13(4):380–387CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soh PN, Delaunay B, Nasr EB, Delannes M, Soulie M, Huyghe E (2014) Evaluation of sexual functions and sexual behaviours after penile brachytherpy in men treated for penile carcinoma. Basic Clin Androl. 24:13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Skeppner E, Windahl T, Andersson SO, Fugl-Meyer KS (2008) Treatment seeking, aspects of sexuality and life satisfaction in men with laser-treated penile carcinoma. Eur Urol 54(3):631–639CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Surgeons of India 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gajanan S. Bhat
    • 1
  • Girish Nelivigi
    • 2
  • Vijayakumar Barude
    • 3
  • Anuradha Shastry
    • 3
  1. 1.General HospitalHonavar, Uttara Kannada DistrictIndia
  2. 2.Rangadorai Memorial HospitalBengaluruIndia
  3. 3.TSS Shripad Hegde Kadave Institute of Medical SciencesSirsiIndia

Personalised recommendations