Advertisement

Corporeal Fibrosis

Penile Prosthesis Implantation and Corporeal Reconstruction
  • Kenneth W. Angermeier
  • Drogo K. Montague
Chapter
Part of the Current Clinical Urology book series (CCU)

Abstract

Implantation of a penile prosthesis in the setting of corporeal fibrosis can be a significant challenge. This condition occurs most commonly following removal of a previously implanted penile prosthesis for infection or erosion (1,2). Additional etiologies of corporeal fibrosis include priapism (3), penile trauma (4), Peyronie’ s disease (5,6), intracavernosal injection therapy (7), and idiopathic (8). The extent of fibrosis within the corporeal bodies may vary, and it may occur unilaterally or bilaterally. The primary problem presented by the fibrosis during penile prosthesis implantation is interference with satisfactory dilation of the corporeal bodies and subsequent corporotomy closure. Following surgery, the main problem encountered is often patient dissatisfaction regarding functional erectile legth. This can be a significant issue that must be extensively reviewed with the patient preoperatively to ensure that he understands the inherent difficulties of the surgical and has realistic expectations.

Keywords

Penile Prosthesis Corporeal Body Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Hegar Dilator Penile Prosthesis Implantation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Gasser TC, Larsen EH, Bruskewitz RG (1987) Penile prosthesis reimplantation. J Urol 137:46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Montague DK (1987) Periprosthetic infection. J Urol 138:68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Macaluso JN, Sullivan JW (1985) Priapism: review of 34 cases. Urology 25:233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Orvis BR, McAninch JW (1989) Penile rupture. Urol Clin North Am 16:369.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Furlow WL, Swenson HE, Lee RE (1975) Peyronie’s disease: a study of its natural history and treatment with orthovoltage radiotherapy. J Urol 114:69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Devine CJ, Horton CE (1987) Bent penis. Semin Urol 5:251.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Larsen EH, Gasser TC, Bruskewitz RG (1987) Fibrosis of corpus cavernosum after intracavernous injection of phentolamine/papaverine. J Urol 137:292.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fishman IJ (1987) Complicated implantation of inflatable penile prostheses. Urol Clin North Am 14:217.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Padma-Nathan H (1988) Neurological evaluation of erectile dysfunction. Urol Clin North Am 15:77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Knoll LD (1995) Use of penile prosthetic implants in patients with penile fibrosis. Urol Clin North Am 22:857.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Montague DK, Angermeier KW, Lakin MM (1996) Penile prosthesis implantation. In: Marshall FF, ed., Textbook of Operative Urology, Philadelphia: WB Saunders, ch. 85, pp. 712–719.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carson, CC (1989) Infections in genitourinary prostheses. Urol Clin North Am 16:139.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mooreville M, Adrian S, Delk JR II, Wilson SK (1999) Implantation of inflatable penile prosthesis in patients with severe corporeal fibrosis: introduction of a new penile cavernotome. J Urol 162:2054.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Knoll LD, Furlow WL, Benson RC, Bilhartz DL (1995) Management of nondilatable cavernous fibrosis with the use of a downsized inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol 153:366.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carbone DJ, Daitch JA, Angermeier KW, Lakin MM, Montague DK (1998) Management of severe corporeal fibrosis with implantation of prosthesis via a transverse scrotal approach. J Urol 159:125.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herschorn S, Barkin M, Comisarow R (1986) New technique for difficult penile implants. Urology 27:463.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    O’Donnell PD (1986) Operative approach for secondary placement of penile prosthesis. Urology 28:108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fishman IJ (1989) Corporeal reconstruction procedures for complicated penile implants. Urol Clin North Am 16:73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Knoll LD, Furlow WL (1992) Corporeal reconstruction and prosthetic implantation for impotence associated with non-dilatable corporeal cavernosal fibrosis. Acta Urol Belg 60:15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Herschorn S, Ordorica RC (1995) Penile prosthesis insertion with corporeal reconstruction with synthetic vascular graft material. J Urol 154:80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    George VK, Shah GS, Mills R, Dhabuwala CB (1996) The management of extensive penile fibrosis: a new technique of minimal scar-tissue excision. Brit J Urol 77:282.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seftel AD, Oates RD, Goldstein I (1992) Use of a polytetrafluoroethylene tube graft as a circumferential neotunica during placement of a penile prosthesis. J Urol 148:1531.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mulcahy JJ (1987) A technique of maintaining penile prosthesis position to prevent proximal migration. J Urol 137:294.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Szostak MJ, DelPizzo JJ, Sklar GN (2000) The plug and patch: a new technique for repair of corporal perforation during placement of penile prostheses. J Urol 163:1203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mulcahy JJ (1999) Distal corporoplasty for lateral extrusion of penile prosthesis cylinders. J Urol 161:193.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Smith CP, Kraus SR, Boone TB (1998) Management of impending penile prosthesis erosion with a polytetrafluoroethylene distal wind sock graft. J Urol 160:2037.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jarow JP (1996) Risk factors for penile prosthetic infection. J Urol 156:402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mulcahy JJ (2000) Long-term experience with salvage of infected penile implants. J Urol 163:481.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenneth W. Angermeier
  • Drogo K. Montague

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations