MP25-02 EXPLORING THE PREDICTORS OF LOW SATISFACTION AFTER PENILE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Surgical Therapy I1 Apr 2017MP25-02 EXPLORING THE PREDICTORS OF LOW SATISFACTION AFTER PENILE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION Mohamad Habous, Osama Abdelwahab, Osama Laban, Raanan Tal, Saad Mahmoud, Alaa Tealab, Saleh Binsaleh, and John Mulhall Mohamad HabousMohamad Habous More articles by this author , Osama AbdelwahabOsama Abdelwahab More articles by this author , Osama LabanOsama Laban More articles by this author , Raanan TalRaanan Tal More articles by this author , Saad MahmoudSaad Mahmoud More articles by this author , Alaa TealabAlaa Tealab More articles by this author , Saleh BinsalehSaleh Binsaleh More articles by this author , and John MulhallJohn Mulhall More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.02.752AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Despite reportedly high satisfaction with penile implant (PI) surgery, some patients remain dissatisfied. Complications such as infection, mechanical malfunction and erosion remain significant concerns and are major contributors to patient dissatisfaction and regret. We aimed to explore outcomes and complications after PI surgery and to search for predictors of patient satisfaction. METHODS All patients who underwent PI surgery were included in the analysis. Comorbidity, demographic and implant information were recorded. Complications recorded included: minor (requiring no re-operation) such as, penile edema, hematoma, superficial wound breakdown; major (requiring hospitalization or re-operation) such as device infection, erosion, mechanical malfunction. Patient satisfaction was defined using a single question posed to the patient 6 months after surgery with a 5-point Likert scale (1 dissatisfied, 2 somewhat dissatisfied, 3 neutral, 4 somewhat satisfied, 5 satisfied). Descriptive statistics were used to define complication rates and multivariable analysis (MVA) was performed to define predictors of high (satisfaction score =4), including degree of complication, Peyronie's disease (PD), diabetes (DM), number of vascular comorbidities, BMI >30 and patient age. RESULTS 901 patients were analyzed. Mean age 56.6±10.6 years. Mean BMI 30.2±5.1. Comorbidity profile was: diabetes 75%, dyslipidemia 44%, hypertension 33%, cigarette smoker 32%, PD 34%. 76% had a malleable implant and 24% an inflatable implant. 31% had a minor complication and 9% a major complication. 93% had high satisfaction (=4). Patients with any complication had a reduced rate of high satisfaction compared to those without (88% vs 98%; p<0.001) and likewise with a major complication (64% vs 98%; p<0.001). On MVA, BMI >30, number of vascular risk factors, type of implant and DM were not predictive of high satisfaction. Only the absence of a major complication was a significant predictor of high satisfaction (OR 20, 95% CI 9-50, p <0.001). The presence of PD was almost statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS A high percentage of men are satisfied after penile implant surgery. Only the presence of a major complication is robustly linked to a lower likelihood of achieving high satisfaction. © 2017FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 197Issue 4SApril 2017Page: e310-e311 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2017MetricsAuthor Information Mohamad Habous More articles by this author Osama Abdelwahab More articles by this author Osama Laban More articles by this author Raanan Tal More articles by this author Saad Mahmoud More articles by this author Alaa Tealab More articles by this author Saleh Binsaleh More articles by this author John Mulhall More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...