Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

The future of penile implants IJIR special edition: 50th year anniversary on penile implants

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 35, pages 593–595 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

The inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) has come a long way since inception over the last 50 years. Veteran implanters describe a time when for every virgin IPP on the operating room schedule for that day, there were an additional two cases for implant revision, repair, or removal. Attempting to prognosticate the ideal future of implants an additional 50 years from now is an interesting thought experiment. I have had the great fortune of learning from and operating with legendary implanters to build an academic career on this procedure over the last 20 years. In this time, I have experienced the full spectrum of IPP outcomes and their potential improvement opportunities.

IPP remains dreadfully underutilized with estimates of only 1% of all IPP-eligible patients who have failed all other erectile dysfunction (ED) therapies undergoing surgery. On average, it takes 39 months for men after retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) to get an IPP if they need one [1], probably about 2 years too late. A different study found that nearly 60% of post-RRP IPP patients reported regret for not having had it earlier with more than half having waited more than 5 years too long [2].

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Bajic P, Mahon J, Faraday M, Sadeghi-Nejad H, Hakim L, McVary KT. Etiology of erectile dysfunction and duration of symptoms in patients undergoing penile prosthesis: a systematic review. Sex Med Rev. 2020;8:333–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Van Huele A, Mennes J, Chung E, Van Renterghem K. Majority of erectile dysfunction patients would have preferred earlier implantation of their penile prosthesis: validation of the recently changed EAU guidelines. Int J Impot Res. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00620-1.

  3. Kohn TP, Rajanahally S, Hellstrom WJG, Hsieh TC, Raheem OA. Global trends in prevalence, treatments, and costs of penile prosthesis for erectile dysfunction in men. Eur Urol Focus. 2022;8:803–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baas W, O’Connor B, Welliver C, Stahl PJ, Stember DS, Wilson SK, et al. Worldwide trends in penile implantation surgery: data from over 63,000 implants. Transl Androl Urol. 2020;9:31–37.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Bernal RM, Henry GD. Contemporary patient satisfaction rates for three-piece inflatable penile prostheses. Adv Urol. 2012;2012:707321.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Salter CA, Bach PV, Jenkins L, Bennett N, Yafi FA, El Khatib F, et al. Development and validation of the satisfaction survey for inflatable penile implant (SSIPI). J Sex Med. 2021;18:1641–51.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Trost LW, Baum N, Hellstrom WJ. Managing the difficult penile prosthesis patient. J Sex Med. 2013;10:893–906.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ziegelmann M, Köhler TS, Bailey GC, Miest T, Manaf Alom M, Trost L. Surgical patient selection and counseling. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6:609–19.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Deveci S, Martin D, Parker M, Mulhall JP. Penile length alterations following penile prosthesis surgery. Eur Urol. 2007;51:1128–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Onyeji IC, Sui W, Pagano MJ, Weinberg AC, James MB, Theofanides MC, et al. Impact of surgeon case volume on reoperation rates after inflatable penile prosthesis surgery. J Urol. 2017;197:223–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Helo S, Moulton CE. Complications: acknowledging, managing, and coping with human error. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6:773–82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Kramer AC, Schweber A. Patient expectations prior to coloplast titan penile prosthesis implant predicts postoperative satisfaction. J Sex Med. 2010;7:2261–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Van Dyke M, Baumgarten AS, Ortiz N, Hudak SJ, Morey AF. State of the reservoir: current concepts of penile implant reservoir placement and potential complications. Curr Urol Rep. 2021;22:20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Khoei A, Racik N, Bansal U, Flores F, Khera M. The low submuscular reservoir placement with transfascial fixation for inflatable penile prostheses. J Sex Med. 2022;19:1309–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Köhler TS, Wen L, Wilson SK. Penile implant infection prevention part 1: what is fact and what is fiction? Wilson’s Workshop #9. Int J Impot Res. 2021;33:785–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mulcahy JJ, Köhler TS, Wen L, Wilson SK. Penile implant infection prevention part II: device coatings have changed the game. Int J Impot Res. 2021;33:801–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pan S, Rodriguez D, Thirumavalavan N, Gross MS, Eid JF, Mulcahy J, et al. The use of antiseptic solutions in the prevention and management of penile prosthesis infections: a review of the cytotoxic and microbiological effects of common irrigation solutions. J Sex Med. 2019;16:781–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gupta NK, Ring J, Trost L, Wilson SK, Köhler TS. The penoscrotal surgical approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6:628.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Garber BB, Khurgin JL, Stember DS, Perito PE. Pseudo-malfunction of the coloplast titan inflatable penile prosthesis one-touch release pump. Urology. 2014;84:857–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Habashy E, Bole R, Helo S. IPP improvements-recent innovations, current iterations, and developments in the pipeline. J Sex Med. 2022;19:1604–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Miller LE, Khera M, Bhattacharyya S, Patel M, Nitschelm K, Burnett AL. Long-term survival rates of inflatable penile prostheses: systematic review and meta-analysis. Urology. 2022;166:6–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Welliver C, Kottwitz M, Ahmad AE, Wilson SK, Köhler TS. Manufacturers’ data show increasing implanted cylinder sizes and measured corporal lengths in inflatable penile implants. World J Urol. 2016;34:993–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tsambarlis PN, Chaus F, Levine LA. Successful placement of penile prostheses in men with severe corporal fibrosis following vacuum therapy protocol. J Sex Med. 2017;14:44–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Henry GD, Carrion R, Jennermann C, Wang R. Prospective evaluation of postoperative penile rehabilitation: penile length/girth maintenance 1 year following Coloplast Titan inflatable penile prosthesis. J Sex Med. 2015;12:1298–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Miranda-Sousa A, Keating M, Moreira S, Baker M, Carrion R. Concomitant ventral phalloplasty during penile implant surgery: a novel procedure that optimizes patient satisfaction and their perception of phallic length after penile implant surgery. J Sex Med. 2007;4:1494–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stember DS, Kohler TS, Morey AF. Management of perforation injuries during and following penile prosthesis surgery. J Sex Med. 2015;12:456–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Skrodzka M, Heffernan Ho D, Ralph D. Floppy glans—classification, diagnosis and treatment. Sex Med Rev. 2020;8:303–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ziegelmann MJ, Alom M, Bole R, Kohler T, Trost L. Modified glanulopexy technique for supersonic transporter deformity and glanular hypermobility in men with penile prostheses. J Sex Med. 2018;15:914–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ellis JL, Sudhakar A, Simhan J. Enhanced recovery strategies after penile implantation: a narrative review. Transl Androl Urol. 2021;10:2648–57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Witthaus MW, Saba P, Melnyk R, Ajay D, Ralph D, Van Renterghem K, et al. The future of penile prosthetic surgical training is here: design of a hydrogel model for inflatable penile prosthetic placement using modern education theory. J Sex Med. 2020;17:2299–306.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Tobias S. Köhler

Authors
  1. Tobias S. Köhler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All contributions were made by the sole author, TK.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tobias S. Köhler.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Köhler, T.S. The future of penile implants IJIR special edition: 50th year anniversary on penile implants. Int J Impot Res 35, 593–595 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00751-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00751-z

Search

Advanced search

Quick links