Although it is estimated that nearly 20 million Americans suffer from erectile dysfunction (ED), the true prevalence of this disorder is unknown (1). Worldwide studies have demonstrated that the prevalence of ED increases with age. The overall population growth, an increase in the elderly population, the introduction of effective oral medications for ED, and the intensified public awareness and education may result in a higher rate of seeking and using treatment (2). Patients with severe end organ failure who do not respond to any nonsurgical therapy will eventually be candidates for penile prosthesis. Although the percentage of such patients compared to the total number of patients with ED may be small, penile prosthesis implantation will remain a viable option because of the large patient base. Vendors claim that sales of penile prostheses have been relatively stable in the last decade. Since the introduction of penile prosthesis implantation to treat male ED in the 1970s, the modifications and improvements of penile prostheses have remarkably improved the device’s reliability, longevity, and the prosthetic surgery outcome (3). In this chapter, we review different penile prostheses available in the United States and their clinical indications.
- Penile Prosthesis
- American Medical System
- Photo Courtesy
- Inflatable Penile Prosthesis
- Mentor Corporation
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Lewis RW, McKinlay J, Laumann E, et al. Epidemiology and natural history of erctile dysfunction; risk factors including iatrogenic and aging. In: Proceedings of First International Consultation on Erectile Dysfunction. Jardin A, Wagner G, Khoury S, et al., eds., Health Publication Ltd., 1, 2000; 19.
Shabsigh R. Editorial: penile prostheses toward the end of the millennium. J Urol 1998; 159: 819.
Wang R, Lewis RW. Reoperation for penile prosthesis implantation. In: Current Clinical Urology Series on Urologic Prostheses. Carson CC, ed., Humana, New Jersey, 2000.
Krauss DJ, Lantinga LJ, Carey MP, et al. Use of the malleable penile prosthesis in the treatment of erectile dysfunction: a prospective study of post-operative adjustment. J Urol 1989; 142: 988–991.
Montorsi F, Guazzoni G, Bergamaschi F, et al. Patient-partner satisfaction with semirigid penile prosthesis for Peyronie’s disease: a 5-year followup study. J Urol 1993; 150: 1819–1821.
Marzi M, Zucchi A, Lombi R, et al. Implant surgery in Peyronie’s disease. Urol Int 1997; 58: 113–116.
Gross AJ, Sauerwein DH, Kutzenberger J, et al. Penile prostheses in paraplegic men. Br J Urol 1996; 78: 262 264.
Wilson SK. Penile prosthesis implantation: pearls, pitfalls, and perils. In: Male Infertility and Sexual Dysfunction. Hellstrom WJG, ed., Springer, New York 1997; 529.
Mulcahy JJ. Overview of penile implants. In: Topics in clinical urology: diagnosis and management of male sexual dysfunction Mulcahy JJ, ed., IgakuShoin, New York 1997; 218.
Kearse WS Jr., Sago AL, Peretsman SJ, et al. Report of a multicenter clinical evaluation of the Dura-II penile prosthesis. J Urol 1996; 155: 1613–1616.
Kabalin JN, Kuo JC. Long-term followup of and patient satisfaction with the Dynaflex self-contained inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol 1997; 158: 456–459.
Wilson SK, Cleves M, Delk JR. Long-term results with Hydroflex and Dynaflex penile prostheses: device survival comparison to multicomponent inflatables. J Urol 1996; 155: 1621–1623.
Anafarta K, Yaman O, Aydos K. Clinical experience with Dynaflex penile prostheses in 120 patients. Urology 1998; 52: 1098–1100.
Govier FE. The surgical management of erectile dysfunction utilizing inflatable prosthetic devices. AUA Update Series 1996; 15: 78.
Dubocq F, Tefilli MV, Gheiler EL, et al. Long-term mechanical reliability of multicomponent inflatable penile prosthesis: comparison of device survival. Urology 1998; 52: 277–281.
Hakim LD, Kulaksizoglu H, Hambill BK, et al. A guide to safe corporotomy incisions in the presence of underlying inflatable penile cylinders: results of in vitro and in vivo studies. J Urol 1996; 155: 918–923.
Levine LA, Estrada CR, Mattem Q, et al. Two center experience with the Ambicor penile prosthesis. J Uro1163: Abstract 2000, 999, 225.
Carson CC. Inflatable penile prosthesis. In: Textbook of Erectile Dysfunction. Carson CC, Kirby R, Goldstein I, eds., Isis Medical Media Ltd Oxford 1999; 423.
Wilson SK, Delk JR. A new treatment for Peyronie’s disease: modeling the penis over an inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol 1994; 152: 1121–1123.
Dubocq FM, Bianco FJ Jr., Maralani SJ, et al. Outcome analysis of penile implant surgery after external beam radiation for prostate cancer. J Urol 1997; 158: 1787–1790.
Khoudary KP, DeWolf WC, Bruning CO III. Morgentaler A. Immediate sexual rehabilitation by simultaneous placement of penile prosthesis in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: initial results in 50 patients. Urology 1997; 50: 395–399.
Upadhyay J, Shekarriz B, Dhabuwala CB. Penile implant for intractable priapism associated with sickle cell disease. Urology 1998; 51: 638, 639.
Lewis R. Surgery for erectile dysfunction. In: Campbell’s Urology 17th edition. Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED Jr., et al, eds., W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia 1998; 1215.
Garber BB, Marcus SM. Does surgical approach affect the incidence of inflatable penile prosthesis infection? Urology 1998; 52: 291–293.
Wilson SK, Cleves MA, Delk JR. Comparison of mechanical reliability of original and enhanced Mentor Alpha I penile prosthesis. J Urol 1999; 162: 715–718.
Wilson SK, Delk JR, Dhabuwala CB. Early results with new lockout valve to prevent auto inflation of Mentor Alpha 1 penile prosthesis. J Urol 1999; 161: (4) suppl; 259.
Goldstein I, Geffin M. Mentor Lock-out Valve study group. Prevention of auto-inflation in the Mentor Alpha-1 three piece inflatable penile prosthesis: preliminary results of the Lock-out Valve study. J Urol 1999; 161: (4) suppl; 260.
Daitch JA, Angermeier KW, Lakin MM, et al. Long-term mechanical reliability of AMS 700 series inflatable penile prostheses: comparison of CX/CXM and Ultrex cylinders. J Urol 1997; 158: 1400–1402.
Kowalczyk JJ, Mulcahy JJ. Penile curvatures and aneurysmal defects with the Ultrex penile prosthesis corrected with insertion of the AMS700CX. J Urol 1996; 156: 398–401.
Holloway FB, Farah RN. Intermediate term assessment of the reliability, function and patient satisfaction with the AMS700 Ultrex penile prosthesis. J Urol 1997; 157: 1687–1691.
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wang, R., Lewis, R.W. (2001). Penile Implants. In: Mulcahy, J.J. (eds) Male Sexual Function. Current Clinical Urology. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-098-8_15
Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ
Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-5701-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-098-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive