Skip to main content

Table 4 Factors related to surgical revision and to PP removal

From: Long-term outcomes after penile prosthesis placement for the Management of Erectile Dysfunction: a single-Centre experience

  Surgical revision (N = 32) No surgical revision (N = 98) No PP removal (N = 110) PP removal (N = 20)
Age (years), mean ± SD1 60.2 (8.8) 62.5 (9.3) 62.2 (9.3) 60.6 (8.6)
PP size (cm), mean ± SD1 17.2 (1.8) 16.7 (2.4) 16.7 (2.3) 17.2 (2)
Surgical approach, n (%)2
 Peno-scrotal 29 (90.6) 67 (68.4) * 78 (70.9) 18 (90)
 Infra-pubic 3 (9.4) 31 (31.6) * 32 (29.1) 2 (10)
Type of PP, n (%)2
 Coloplast Titan 15 (46.9) 39 (39.8) 45 (40.9) 9 (45)
 AMS 700 17 (53.1) 59 (60.2) 65 (59.1) 11 (55)
Previous AUS, n (%)2 2 (6.3) 5 (5.1) 6 (5.5) 1 (5)
Previous PP, n (%)2 3 (9.4) 2 (2.1) 2 (1.8) 4 (20) *
Diabetes, n (%)2 15 (46.9) 35 (35.7) 39 (35.5) 11 (55)
Radical prostatectomy, n (%)2 12 (37.5) 47 (48) 53 (48.2) 6 (30)
Hypertension, n (%)2 19 (59.4) 47 (48) 54 (49.1) 12 (60)
Smoking, n (%)2 12 (37.5) 37 (37.8) 42 (38.2) 7 (35)
Dyslipidemia, n (%)2 13 (40.1) 27 (27.6) 31 (28.2) 9 (45)
  1. PP penile prosthesis, AUS artificial urinary sphincter, SD standard deviation
  2. * p-value< 0.05
  3. 1 Mann-Whitney U test
  4. 2 Pearson’s Chi2 test