A Quality Analysis of the Last Decade's Most Heavily Cited Data Relative to Outcomes After Penile Prosthesis Placement

Under-recognized factors affecting penile implant satisfaction in patients

INTRODUCTION

Surgical management via penile prosthesis is an option for patients who have failed medical management. There is a paucity of literature surrounding factors contributing to patient satisfaction after implant surgery. The objective of this study was to characterize patients' and surgeons' attitudes toward factors affecting satisfaction with this procedure.

METHODS

Two patient cohorts were identified and contacted via email: a medical management of erectile dysfunction (ED) cohort and a penile implant patient cohort. A third cohort, Canadian urologists who perform penile implant surgeries, was also contacted. The surveys consisted of 5-7 questions, including a rating question regarding the importance of various penile implant factors.

RESULTS

Forty-six ED patients, 45 post-implant patients, and 12 urologists completed the survey. The mean overall satisfaction on a 10-point scale was 6.49 (standard deviation [SD] 2.92). Most (67%) urologists selected patient satisfaction as one of their least favorite aspects of penile implant surgery. Compared to postimplant patients, ED patients reported greater importance in the areas of appearance (p=0.035), soft glans (p=0.040), and concealment of implant (p=0.007). Urologists ranked natural feel (p=0.019) and generating a discrete erection (p=0.022) as less important than patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study that examines which specific variables of penile implant surgery are associated with satisfaction while comparing surgeons' understanding of what patients desire from this surgery. This study identifies several factors deemed important by patients but under-recognized by urologists. This knowledge can aid urologists in optimizing preoperative counselling and improving patient satisfaction.

Penile implant surgery-managing complications

Penile prosthesis surgery represents the end-stage treatment for erectile dysfunction. It is conventionally used only in cases of erectile dysfunction refractory to pharmacological treatments or vacuum constriction devices. Contemporary literature suggests that penile prothesis surgery is associated with a high satisfaction rate and a low complication profile. However, it must be appreciated that the complications of surgery can have devastating consequences on a patient’s quality of life and satisfaction and include infection, prosthesis malfunction, penile corporal perforation and penile length loss. Several factors – such as appropriate patient selection, methodical preoperative assessment and patient optimization, specific intraoperative protocols and postoperative recommendations – can reduce the risk of surgical complications. This narrative review discusses the diagnosis and management of both intraoperative and postoperative complications of penile prosthesis surgery.

Development and Validation of the Satisfaction Survey for Inflatable Penile Implant (SSIPI)

BACKGROUND

No validated English language patient-reported outcome (PRO) currently exists that assesses satisfaction with inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Satisfaction data have been largely based primarily on surgeon assessment of patients or using questionnaires that have not been designed for this purpose.

AIM

To develop an English-language validated PRO that assesses patient satisfaction after IPP surgery.

METHODS

Initially, a literature review and discussions with experts defined domains important to IPP satisfaction (pain, appearance, function, overall satisfaction). The initial 35-item Satisfaction Survey for Inflatable Penile Implant (SSIPI) was developed. Cognitive interviews were then performed with IPP patients (n = 12) to gain feedback on the SSIPI domains and items. These data were used to modify SSIPI with the addition of 2 questions for a final item number of 37. Patients from 4 centers, who were between 6 months and 5 years after IPP, were administered the questionnaire through RedCap. Reliability statistics and content analysis were used to winnow questions to yield the final 16-item version of the SSIPI. Internal consistency was assessed via Cronbach's alpha and item-total correlation. Test-retest reliability was assessed via intraclass correlation coefficients using baseline and 2-week data. For convergent validity, the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction and the Self-Esteem and Relationship (SEAR) questionnaire were used. For discriminant validity, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was used. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess the factor structure of the SSIPI.

OUTCOMES

Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and confirmatory factor analysis were assessed.

RESULTS

118 men were surveyed. Mean age was 66.8 ± 9.5 years. The 16-item SSIPI showed high internal consistency with an overall Cronbach's Alpha of 0.97 (domains 0.85-0.89). Item-total correlations for individual items to subscales ranged from 0.60 to 0.91. The overall test-retest reliability was 0.94 (domains 0.87-0.93). Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction and Self-Esteem and Relationship had correlations of 0.84 overall (domains 0.57-0.79) and 0.47 overall (domains 0.34-0.44), respectively. International Prostate Symptom Score (discriminant validity) had correlations of -0.29 overall (domains -0.17 to -0.31).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

SSIPI is the first English-language validated IPP satisfaction PRO. This will enable clinicians to collect satisfaction data in a standardized way.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

As strengths we have used a rigorous psychometric process and have no industry sponsorship. Limitations include small numbers of specific subpopulations.

CONCLUSION

The SSIPI has demonstrated robust psychometric properties. Salter CA, Bach PV, Jenkins L, et al. Development and Validation of the Satisfaction Survey for Inflatable Penile Implant (SSIPI). J Sex Med 2021;18:1641-1651.