Open AccessChronic pain associated with penile prostheses may persist despite revision or explantation
Author(s) -
Jeffrey Campbell,
Ernest Chan,
Andrew Di Pierdominico,
Serkan Karakus,
Bruce J. Trock,
Gerald Brock,
Arthur L. Burnett
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
canadian urological association journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1920-1214
pISSN - 1911-6470
DOI - 10.5489/cuaj.7391
Subject(s) - medicine , chronic pain , surgery , erectile dysfunction , penile prosthesis , refractory (planetary science) , intractable pain , intervention (counseling) , prosthesis , physical therapy , physics , psychiatry , astrobiology
Inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation is the gold-standard treatment for medically refractory erectile dysfunction. New chronic pain after IPP implantation is rarely discussed and the optimal treatment is unclear. We evaluated whether IPP reoperation for a primary indication of chronic pain improves patients’ symptoms. Our secondary aim was to explore factors associated with resolution or persistence of pain after IPP reoperation.Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 315 patients who had an IPP revision or explantation at two high-volume prosthetic centers between May 2007 and May 2017. We excluded patients who had device malfunction, pain for <2 months, pain associated with infection or erosion, and patients without long-term followup data. Persistent pain was diagnosed based on patient self-report.Results: A total of 31 patients met our criteria for having undergone a surgical revision (n=18) or explantation (n=13) for pain relief. Eighteen (58%) patients had persistent pain despite surgical intervention. Only patients who had pain secondary to a device malposition improved after reoperation (n=13). A prior diagnosis of a chronic pain syndrome was associated with persistent pain despite intervention. Pain improvement was not associated with age, comorbid conditions, duration of implant, or the number of surgical revisions performed.Conclusions: Surgical intervention for chronic penile prosthesis pain is unlikely to relieve symptoms, particularly for patients with chronic pain disorders. Patients should be counselled that IPP reoperative procedures as a treatment for pain should be avoided unless the device is identified to be malpositioned, and consideration of alternative therapeutic options may be more beneficial.