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.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Evaluating treatment pathways for Peyronie’s disease utilizing the TriNetX research registry

Peyronie’s disease (PD) is a fibrosing condition that affects the penis which leads to pain, curvature, sexual dysfunction, and psychological bother. Our retrospective cohort analysis aims to evaluate the current treatment pathways utilized for PD. We queried the TriNetX database for all adult men (≥18 years) with PD using the International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) code, N48.6, from the years 2003–2023. All interventions associated were assessed using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and Medical Prescription Normalized (RxNorm) codes. These included injection therapy, penile plication, plaque excision ± grafting, penile implant, and oral pentoxifylline. Of the 51011 PD cases identified, observation was the most common management (72.1%, n = 36 787). Pentoxifylline (70.0%, n = 4 699) was the most used single medical treatment followed by injection therapy (30.0%, n = 2 012). Penile plication was the most performed surgery for PD (55.1%, n = 1 793). Among patients who underwent multiple therapies (30.0%, n = 4 261), a progression of medical to surgical treatment only occurred in 24.5% (n = 1 044). PD is predominantly managed with observative measures, followed by medical therapy, and surgery. Surgical therapy occurred less frequently after medical treatment suggesting that few patients are interested in or may have limited access to a stepwise approach for the treatment of PD.

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

Access options

Buy this article

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

Fig. 1: Treatment pathways for Peyronie’s disease.

Data availability

The data used in this study is available thought the TriNetX database. To gain access, a request can be made to TriNetX (https://live.trinetx.com), but costs may be incurred, a data sharing agreement would be necessary, and no patient identifiable information can be obtained.

References

  1. Mulhall JP, Schiff J, Guhring P. An analysis of the natural history of Peyronie’s disease. J Urol. 2006;175:2115–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(06)00270-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ziegelmann MJ, Bajic P, Levine LA. Peyronie’s disease: contemporary evaluation and management. Int J Urol. 2020;27:504–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.14230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nehra A, Alterowitz R, Culkin DJ, Faraday MM, Hakim LS, Heidelbaugh JJ, et al. Peyronie’s disease: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2015;194:745–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.05.098.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Chung PH, Han TM, Rudnik B, Das AK. Peyronie’s disease: what do we know and how do we treat it? Can J Urol. 2020;27:11–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sischka M, Krueger A, Parikh N, Köhler T, Helo S, Ziegelmann M. Significant geographic variation in access to certified collagenase clostridium histolyticum injectors for Peyronie’s disease throughout the United States. Urol Pr. 2023;10:680–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

AG—data curation, formal analysis, writing—original draft, review and editing. JYL—data curation, formal analysis, writing—original draft, review and editing. HF—writing—review and editing. DE—data curation, formal analysis, writing—review and editing. ZP—data curation, formal analysis, writing—review and editing. ML—data curation, supervision, writing—review and editing. PHC—conceptualization, supervision, writing—review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul H. Chung.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghosh, A., Leong, J.Y., Foss, H. et al. Evaluating treatment pathways for Peyronie’s disease utilizing the TriNetX research registry. Int J Impot Res 36, 168–170 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00815-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00815-0

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links