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