Advertisement
You are prohibited from using or uploading content you accessed through this website into external applications, bots, software, or websites, including those using artificial intelligence technologies and infrastructure, including deep learning, machine learning and large language models and generative AI.
No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Feb 2016

The Who, How and What of Real-World Penile Implantation in 2015: The PROPPER Registry Baseline Data

    View All Author Information

    Purpose:

    To date, the published data on patients treated with penile implantation generally consist of small series of single surgeon, retrospective experiences rather than prospective or large, multicenter evaluations. This study establishes a baseline of data collection from the PROPPER (Prospective Registry of Outcomes with Penile Prosthesis for Erectile Restoration). The PROPPER is the first large, prospective, multicenter, multinational, monitored, and internal review board approved study of real-world outcomes for patients with penile implants.

    Materials and Methods:

    Data from the PROPPER study were examined to determine patient baseline characteristics and primary and secondary etiologies before treatment of erectile dysfunction. Data include type and size of implant received, surgical steps/techniques used during implantation, and duration of hospital stay.

    Results:

    Through April 2, 2015 a total of 1,019 patients were enrolled in the study at 11 sites, with radical prostatectomy being the predominant etiology in 285 (28%). Of those 285 patients treated with radical prostatectomy 280 (98.2%) received an AMS 700™. Of these patients 65.0% (182 of 280) had placement of the reservoir in the traditional retropubic space vs 31.8% (89 of 280) in a submuscular location. Of those patients not treated with radical prostatectomy receiving an AMS 700, fewer underwent reservoir placement in the submuscular location (17.7%, 124 of 702, vs 80.9%, 568 of 702; p <0.001). Of those patients receiving an AMS 700, those treated with radical prostatectomy and those with diabetes had more outpatient admissions (less than 24 hours, 56.8% and 52.1%, respectively) compared to those with cardiovascular disease and Peyronie’s disease (42.0% and 35.6%, respectively, p <0.001).

    Conclusions:

    This first-of-its-kind, large, prospective, multicenter study reveals most penile implant cases in North America receive an inflatable penile prosthesis and that radical prostatectomy is the most common primary etiology of penile implant surgery. Moreover, patients treated with radical prostatectomy were more likely to have the reservoir placed in a submuscular location, have a longer operating room time and be admitted to the hospital overnight compared with other patient groups.

    References

    • 1 : The AMS 700 inflatable penile prosthesis: long-term experience with the controlled expansion cylinders. J Urol1993; 149: 46. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 2 : Mechanical reliability, surgical complications, and patient and partner satisfaction of the modern three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology1998; 52: 282. Google Scholar
    • 3 : Factors influencing the outcomes of penile prosthesis surgery at a teaching institution. Urology2003; 62: 918. Google Scholar
    • 4 : Penile prosthesis cultures during revision surgery: a multicenter study. J Urol2004; 172: 153. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 5 : The prosthesis salvage operation: immediate replacement of the infected penile prosthesis. J Urol1996; 155: 155. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 6 : Enhancing cancer registry data for comparative effectiveness research (CER) project: overview and methodology. J Registry Manag2014; 41: 103. Google Scholar
    • 7 : Brazilian Registry of Bone Biopsy (REBRABO): design, data elements and methodology. J Bras Nefrol2014; 36: 352. Google Scholar
    • 8 : German psoriasis registry PsoBest: objectives, methodology and baseline data. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges2014; 12: 48. Google Scholar
    • 9 : Italian Registry of Haemophilia and Allied Disorders. Objectives, methodology and data analysis. Haemophilia2008; 14: 444. Google Scholar
    • 10 : Baseline data from the TRiUS registry: symptoms and comorbidities of testosterone deficiency. Postgrad Med2011; 123: 17. Google Scholar
    • 11 : Updates in inflatable penile prostheses. Urol Clin North Am2007; 34: 535. Google Scholar
    • 12 : Reservoir alternate surgical implantation technique: preliminary outcomes of initial PROPPER study of low profile or spherical reservoir implantation in submuscular location or traditional prevesical space. J Urol2015; 193: 239. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 13 : Outcomes and satisfaction rates for the redesigned 2-piece penile prosthesis. J Urol2007; 177: 262. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 14 : Review of penile prosthetic reservoir: complications and presentation of a modified reservoir placement technique. J Sex Med2012; 9: 2759. Google Scholar
    • 15 : Outcomes of lateral retroperitoneal reservoir placement of three-piece penile prosthesis in patients following radical prostatectomy. Int J Impot Res2010; 22: 279. Google Scholar
    • 16 : Ectopic reservoir placement–no longer in the space of Retzius. J Sex Med2011; 8: 2395. Google Scholar
    • 17 : Traditional (retroperitoneal) and abdominal wall (ectopic) reservoir placement. J Sex Med2011; 8: 656. Google Scholar
    • 18 : A guide for inflatable penile prosthesis reservoir placement: pertinent anatomical measurements of the retropubic space. J Sex Med2014; 11: 273. Google Scholar
    Advertisement