Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Current practice in the management of ischemic priapism: an anonymous survey of ISSM members

Abstract

Penile shunting is the standard of care in management of ischemic priapism refractory (IPR) to non-surgical interventions. Due to high rates of impotence, corporal fibrosis, and loss of penile length, recent literature suggests these patients benefit from immediate penile prosthesis (PP) placement. An IRB-exempt anonymous electronic survey of the 2168 members of the International Society for Sexual Medicine (ISSM) was conducted. The survey included demographic information, confidence, and experience-related management of IPR. The aim was to evaluate current practice patterns in management of IPR and to investigate the role of immediate PP implantation in the management of prolonged (>36 h) IPR. The survey response rate was 11.6% (n = 251). Most respondents were urologists (173), from the USA (49.1%), and had completed a fellowship in male sexual medicine, men’s health, reconstruction, or andrology (71.1%). The majority (91.3%) see at least one case of prolonged priapism (>36 h) that requires surgical management yearly. When looking at volume in training and after, our respondents had a significantly higher experience with penile prostheses (over 70%, > = 10) as compared with shunts (less than 40%, > = 10). Overall, 70.9% of respondents felt more comfortable with a malleable PP than a shunt. However, penile shunts are still preferred as the first line of surgical management by ~80% of respondents as compared with 12.7% who instead prefer a PP. We also found that under 40% of respondents currently use penile MRI or corporal biopsies in their management of prolonged assessment. This is the first study to assess current clinical practices in management of IPR globally. As in any anonymous self-reported survey-based research, recall and sampling bias are an inherent limitation. Penile shunting for IPR continues to be the preferred treatment despite emerging data. Respondents performed PP surgery routinely and feel more confident placing PP than performing penile shunting procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Roghmann F, Becker A, Sammon JD, Ouerghi M, Sun M, Sukumar S, et al. Incidence of priapism in emergency departments in the United States. J Urol. 2013;190:1275–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.03.118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Stein DM, Flum AS, Cashy J, Zhao LC, McVary KT. Nationwide emergency department visits for priapism in the United States. J Sex Med. 2013;10:2418–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Montague DK, Jarow J, Broderick GA, Dmochowski RR, Heaton JP, Lue TF, et al. American urological association guideline on the management of priapism. J Urol. 2003;170:1318–24. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000087608.07371.ca

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hatzimouratidis K, Giuliano F, Moncada I, Muneer A, Salonia A, Verze P, et al. EAU Guidelines on male sexual dysfunction 2018;2018. https://uroweb.org/guideline/male-sexual-dysfunction/.

  5. Salonia A, Eardley I, Giuliano F, Hatzichristou D, Moncada I, Vardi Y, et al. European association of urology guidelines on priapism. Eur Urol. 2014;65:480–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2013.11.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBI.2008.08.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bennett N, Mulhall J. Sickle cell disease status and outcomes of African-American men presenting with priapism. J Sex Med. 2008;5:1244–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00770.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Spycher MA, Hauri D. The ultrastructure of the erectile tissue in priapism. J Urol. 1986;135:142–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Munarriz R, Park K, Huang Y-H, Saenz de Tejada I, Moreland RB, Goldstein I, et al. Reperfusion of ischemic corporal tissue: physiologic and biochemical changes in an animal model of ischemic priapism. Urology. 2003;62:760–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ralph DJ, Borley NC, Allen C, Kirkham A, Freeman A, Minhas S, et al. The use of high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients presenting with priapism. BJU Int. 2010;106:1714–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09368.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nixon RG, O’Connor JL, Milam DF. Efficacy of shunt surgery for refractory low flow priapism: a report on the incidence of failed detumescence and erectile dysfunction. J Urol. 2003;170:883–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000081291.37860.a5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Paladino JR, Wroclawski M, Den Julio A, Teixeira GK, Glina S, Lima Pompeo AC. Urethrocutaneous fistula post-Al-Ghorab shunt. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8:E570–1. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.1774

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Ford-Glanton BS, Patel P, Siddiqui S. Penile gangrene with abscess formation after modified Al-ghorab shunt for idiopathic ischemic priapism. Case Rep Urol. 2014;2014:705417 https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/705417

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Quakels R. [Treatment of a case of priapism by Cavrenospongious anastasmosis.]. Acta Urol Belg. 1964;32:5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sacher EC, Sayegh E, Frensilli F, Crum P, Akers R. Cavernospongiosum shunt in the treatment of priapism. J Urol. 1972;108:97–100.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Barry JM. Priapism: treatment with corpus cavernosum to dorsal vein of penis shunts. J Urol. 1976;116:754–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)58998-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grayhack JT, Mccullough W, O’Conor VJ, Trippel O. Venous bypass to control priapism. Invest Urol. 1964;1:509–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zacharakis E, Raheem A, Freeman A, Skolarikos A, Garaffa G, Christopher AN, et al. The efficacy of the T-shunt procedure and intracavernous tunneling (snake maneuver) for refractory ischemic priapism. J Urol. 2014;191:164–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.07.034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sedigh O, Rolle L, Negro CL, Ceruti C, Timpano M, Galletto E, et al. Early insertion of inflatable prosthesis for intractable ischemic priapism: our experience and review of the literature. Int J Impot Res. 2011;23:158–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijir.2011.23

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zacharakis E, Garaffa G, Raheem AA, Christopher AN, Muneer A, Ralph DJ. Penile prosthesis insertion in patients with refractory ischaemic priapism: early vs delayed implantation. BJU Int. 2014;114:576–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12686

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mireku-Boateng A, Jackson AG. Penile prosthesis in the management of priapism. Urol Int. 1989;44:247–8. https://doi.org/10.1159/000281515

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ralph DJ, Garaffa G, Muneer A, Freeman A, Rees R, Christopher AN, et al. The immediate insertion of a penile prosthesis for acute ischaemic priapism. Eur Urol. 2009;56:1033–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2008.09.044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tausch TJ, Zhao LC, Morey AF, Siegel JA, Belsante MJ, Seideman CA, et al. Malleable penile prosthesis is a cost-effective treatment for refractory ischemic priapism. J Sex Med. 2015;12:824–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Salem EA, El Aasser O. Management of ischemic priapism by penile prosthesis insertion: prevention of distal erosion. J Urol. 2010;183:2300–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.02.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Stember DS, Mulhall JP. Ischemic priapism and implant surgery with sharp corporal fibrosis excision. J Sex Med. 2010;7:1987–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.01863.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Durazi MH, Jalal AA. Penile prosthesis implantation for treatment of postpriapism erectile dysfunction. Urol J. 2008;5:115–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wilson SK, Delk JR, Mulcahy JJ, Cleves M, Salem EA. Upsizing of inflatable penile implant cylinders in patients with corporal fibrosis. J Sex Med. 2006;3:736–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2006.00263.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hollowell CM, Patel RV, Bales GT, Gerber GS. Internet and postal survey of endourologic practice patterns among American urologists. J Urol. 2000;163:1779–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim HL, Hollowell CM, Patel RV, Bales GT, Clayman RV, Gerber GS. Use of new technology in endourology and laparoscopy by american urologists: internet and postal survey. Urology. 2000;56:760–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Katz DJ, Stember DS, Nelson CJ, Mulhall JP. Perioperative prevention of penile prosthesis infection: practice patterns among surgeons of SMSNA and ISSM. J Sex Med. 2012;9:1705–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02724.x. quiz712-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tal R, Teloken P, Mulhall JP. Erectile function rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy: practice patterns among AUA members. J Sex Med. 2011;8:2370–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02355.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Butaney M, Thirumavalavan N, Hockenberry MS, Kirby EW, Pastuszak AW, Lipshultz LI. Variability in penile duplex ultrasound international practice patterns, technique, and interpretation: an anonymous survey of ISSM members. Int J Impot Res 2018:1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-018-0061-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part by NIH grant K12 DK0083014, the Multidisciplinary K12 Urologic Research (KURe) Career Development Program awarded to Dolores J. Lamb (Nannan Thirumavalavan is a K12 Scholar). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohit Butaney.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

MSG and RM have served as consultants for Coloplast. The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Butaney, M., Thirumavalavan, N., Rodriguez, D. et al. Current practice in the management of ischemic priapism: an anonymous survey of ISSM members. Int J Impot Res 31, 404–409 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-019-0120-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-019-0120-4

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links