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:

Long-term outcomes of surgery for Peyronie’s disease: focus on patient satisfaction

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 33, pages 332–338 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Immediate outcomes of surgery for Peyronie’s disease (PD) are fairly easy to analyze. However, it is the patient-reported long-term outcomes which eventually determine the success of PD treatment. The goal of this observational study was to evaluate patients’ satisfaction with results of surgical treatment for PD at long-term follow-up. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who were completely satisfied with their erectile function and penile appearance. We retrospectively identified 374 patients who underwent surgery for PD (median follow-up: 9.5 years) and attempted to invite them for follow-up visit; 342 patients were available for follow-up. Only 285 (83.3%) were sexually active. Among all patients, 197 (57.6%) were completely satisfied with penile appearance; among sexually active patients, 139 (40.6%) were completely satisfied with their erections. Only 101 patients (29.5%) were completely satisfied with penile appearance and erectile function. Logistic regression analysis revealed preoperative IIEF-EF score (OR = 1.668 per 1 point; 95% CI 1.469–1.894), tunica albuginea plication (OR = 5.599; 95% CI = 1.014–30.92), use of saphenous vein (OR = 8.517; 95% CI = 2.491–29.115), and cadaveric pericardium (OR = 61.388; 95% CI = 7.674–491.11) as significant predictors of satisfaction with erectile function. Severity of curvature (OR = 0.926 per 5°; 95% CI = 0.907–0.946) and tunica plication (OR = 0.117; 95% CI = 0.019–0.738) were negative predictors of satisfaction with penile appearance. Preoperative IIEF-EF (OR = 1.497 per 1 point; 95% CI = 1.322–1.694), severity of penile curvature (OR = 0.967 per 5°; 95% CI = 0.95–0.983), and use of pericardium allograft (OR = 10.728; 95% CI = 1.363–84.46) were predictors of both endpoints (satisfaction with erectile function and cosmesis). Despite excellent surgical outcomes in PD, patients’ satisfaction with penile appearance and erectile function is far from absolute and depends on many patient-related and treatment-related factors.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chung E. Penile reconstructive surgery in Peyronie disease: challenges in restoring normal penis size, shape, and function. World J Mens Health. 2018;36:e10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Krishnappa P, Fernandez-Pascual E, Carballido J, Moncada I, Lledo-Garcia E, Martinez-Salamanca JI. Surgical management of Peyronie’s disease with co-existent erectile dysfunction. Sex Med. 2019;7:361–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chung E, Clendinning E, Lessard L, Brock G. Five-year follow-up of Peyronie’s graft surgery: outcomes and patient satisfaction. J Sex Med. 2011;8:594–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Morgado A, Morgado MR, Tomada N. Penile lengthening with porcine small intestinal submucosa grafting in Peyronie’s disease treatment: long‐term surgical outcomes, patients’ satisfaction and dissatisfaction predictors. Andrology. 2018;6:909–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Soave A, Laurich S, Dahlem R, Vetterlein MW, Engel O, Nieder T, et al. Negative self-perception and self-attitude of sexuality is a risk factor for patient dissatisfaction following penile surgery with small intestinal submucosa grafting for the treatment of severe Peyronie’s disease. J Clin Med. 2019;8:1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hatzichristodoulou G, Osmonov D, Kübler H, Hellstrom WJG, Yafi FA. Contemporary review of grafting techniques for the surgical treatment of Peyronie’s disease. Sex Med Rev. 2017;5:544–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ziegelmann MJ, Farrell MR, Levine LA. Modern treatment strategies for penile prosthetics in Peyronie’s disease: a contemporary clinical review. Asian J Androl. 2020;22:51–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rice PG, Somani BK, Rees RW. Twenty years of plaque incision and grafting for Peyronie’s disease: a review of literature. Sex Med. 2019;7:115–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen J, Godschalk M, Katz PG, Mulligan T. Peyronie’s-like plaque after penile injection of prostaglandin E1. J Urol. 1994;152:961–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chung E, Wang R, Ralph D, Levine L, Brock G. A worldwide survey on Peyronie’s disease surgical practice patterns among surgeons. J Sex Med. 2018;15:568–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Garcia-Gomez B, Ralph D, Levine L, Moncada-Iribarren I, Djinovic R, Albersen M, et al. Grafts for Peyronie’s disease: a comprehensive review. Andrology. 2018;6:117–26.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Khera M, Bella A, Karpman E, Brant W, Christine B, Kansas B, et al. Penile prosthesis implantation in patients with Peyronie’s disease: results of the PROPPER study demonstrates a decrease in patient-reported depression. J Sex Med. 2018;15:786–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wallen JJ, Madiraju SK, Wang R, Henry GD. Implementation of length expanding inflatable penile prosthesis is not sufficient to prevent postsurgical penile shortening. Asian J Androl. 2019;21:98–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Al-Thakafi S, Al-Hathal N. Peyronie’s disease: a literature review on epidemiology, genetics, pathophysiology, diagnosis and work-up. Transl Androl Urol. 2016;5:280–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Reddy RS, McKibben MJ, Fuchs JS, Shakir N, Scott J, Morey AF. Plication for severe Peyronie’s deformities has similar long-term outcomes to milder cases. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1498–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Falcone M, Preto M, Ceruti C, Timpano M, Garaffa G, Sedigh O, et al. A comparative study between 2 different grafts used as patches after plaque incision and inflatable penile prosthesis implantation for end-stage Peyronie’s disease. J Sex Med. 2018;15:848–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Askari M, Mohamad Mirjalili SA, Bozorg M, Azizi R, Namiranian N. The prevalence of Peyronie’s disease in diabetic patients—2018—Yazd. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2019;13:604–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Satyanarayan A, Singla N, Morey AF. Penile ossification: a reconstructive challenge. Rev Urol. 2017;19:64–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Dalkin BL, Carter MF. Venogenic impotence following dermal graft repair for Peyronie’s disease. J Urol. 1991;146:849–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Chow AK, Sidelsky SA, Levine LA. Surgical outcomes of plaque excision and grafting and supplemental tunica albuginea plication for treatment of Peyronie’s disease with severe compound curvature. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1021–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mulhall J, Anderson M, Parker M. A surgical algorithm for men with combined Peyronie’s disease and erectile dysfunction: functional and satisfaction outcomes. J Sex Med. 2005;2:132–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Baldini A, Morel-Journel N, Paparel P, Ruffion A, Terrier JE. Patient-reported long-term sexual outcomes following plication surgery for penile curvature: a retrospective 58-patient study. Prog Urol. 2017;27:10–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia

    Safar Gamidov & Gennadiy Sukhikh

  2. V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Moscow, Russia

    Safar Gamidov, Taras Shatylko, Natig Gasanov, Dmitriy Scherbakov, Konstantin Li & Gennadiy Sukhikh

Authors
  1. Safar Gamidov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Taras Shatylko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Natig Gasanov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dmitriy Scherbakov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Konstantin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gennadiy Sukhikh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Taras Shatylko.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The 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

Gamidov, S., Shatylko, T., Gasanov, N. et al. Long-term outcomes of surgery for Peyronie’s disease: focus on patient satisfaction. Int J Impot Res 33, 332–338 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-0297-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-0297-6

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links