PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 6, 2026The Journal of Sexual Medicine0 citations

(325) Complex Case of Distal Penile Prosthesis Erosion Following Multiple Revisions: Surgical Strategy and Outcomes

View Full Paper
SGS GrauJTJ TorremadéMDM D'Anna

Key Points

  • This case aims to address the surgical challenges of reimplanting a penile prosthesis following multiple failures.
  • Surgical approach to replace a malleable penile prosthesis in a previously operated area.
  • Management techniques for fibrosis and intraoperative decision-making are discussed.
  • Emphasis on individualized planning for reconstruction.
  • Three-month follow-up shows good postoperative evolution with no signs of infection or extrusion.
  • At six months, the patient reports full satisfaction and good functionality without complications.

Abstract

Abstract Introduction We present a challenging case of distal penile prosthesis erosion in a 66-year-old male with active smoking habit, who underwent multiple prior penile prosthetic surgeries at an outside center. In 2022, he underwent the first implantation of an AMS 700 inflatable prosthesis, which developed a mechanical malfunction after one year. Following this complication, in May 2023, it was replaced with an AMS TACTRA malleable prosthesis. A few months later, in October 2023, he required another intervention to reduce the cylinder size. Finally, in May 2024, the left cylinder was removed due to imminent extrusion. Objective The patient was referred to our center due to imminent extrusion of the right malleable cylinder and requested reconstruction with a three-component inflatable penile prosthesis. Methods This video presents the surgical approach to a complex penile prosthesis replacement in a scarred and surgically altered corporal environment. It details the techniques used for management of fibrosis, and placement of new cylinders, along with the rationale for intraoperative decision-making. Results At the three-month follow-up visit, the patient shows good postoperative evolution. Wounds are well-healed, with no signs of infection or extrusion. At the six-month follow-up, the patient reports full satisfaction with the result and good prosthesis functionality, without complications. Conclusions This case highlights the surgical complexity of reimplantation following multiple failed prostheses, and the importance of individualized planning and patient-centered care in andrological reconstructive surgery. Disclosure No

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Grau et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a23b9ca71a5da9775e75928https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdag118.295
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper