Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2025
Transcorporal Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff Placement in a Case Requiring Revision for Urethral Atrophy
Published on: June 16, 2022
A systematic review comparing different approaches for inflatable penile prosthesis revision: partial-component
Adnan El-Achkar1, Kareim Khalafalla2, Tuan Thanh Nguyen3
1Department of Urology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut 1107, Lebanon.
Introduction:
In cases of a noninfected malfunctioning inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) device, surgeons often opt to exchange all of the device rather than the defective component for fear of an increased infection rate and future mechanical dysfunction.
Objectives:
To assess whether partial-component exchange of an IPP device has comparable outcomes to complete explant and replacement of an IPP device with or without a retained reservoir.
Methods:
A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR guidelines. Searches were performed on MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, and the Cochrane Library from inception to June 2023, identifying studies reporting outcomes and complications of revision surgery for noninfected malfunctioning IPP devices. Three groups were compared: those undergoing single- or 2-component exchange, those with complete explantation and replacement, and those with replacement of all components while retaining the primary reservoir.
Results:
Analysis included 11 articles comprising 12 202 patients with complete device replacement, 234 with partial device exchange, and 151 with retained reservoirs following revision. Mean ages ranged from 62 to 68 years, with median follow-up times between 3 and 84 months. Partial-component exchange showed a higher infection rate (6.3%) as compared with complete replacement (2.7%) and reservoir retention (3.9%). Similarly, partial exchange had a higher complication rate (23.9%) when compared with complete replacement (11.3%) and reservoir retention (19.6%). Mechanical failure rates for partial exchange were similar across the 3 groups (10%, 2.8%, and 5.8%, respectively).
Conclusion:
Partial-component exchange during IPP revision is associated with higher infection and perioperative complication rates but comparable rates of mechanical failure as compared with complete-component replacement, with or without retaining the original reservoir.
