Comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700CX and Titan penile prostheses

Most widespread three-component penile prosthesis models are 700CX™ and Titan ® . Our purpose is to assess patient and partner satisfaction after the first implant. This is a multicenter, retrospective, nonrandomized study in which all patients who met the inclusion criteria between 2009 and 2013 we...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Javier Romero Otero, César Rojas Cruz, Borja García Gómez, Joaquim Sarquella Geli, Jose Medina Polo, Eduard Ruiz Castañé, Alfredo Rodríguez Antolín
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2017-01-01
Series:Asian Journal of Andrology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ajandrology.com/article.asp?issn=1008-682X;year=2017;volume=19;issue=3;spage=321;epage=325;aulast=Otero
_version_ 1811280440369086464
author Javier Romero Otero
César Rojas Cruz
Borja García Gómez
Joaquim Sarquella Geli
Jose Medina Polo
Eduard Ruiz Castañé
Alfredo Rodríguez Antolín
author_facet Javier Romero Otero
César Rojas Cruz
Borja García Gómez
Joaquim Sarquella Geli
Jose Medina Polo
Eduard Ruiz Castañé
Alfredo Rodríguez Antolín
author_sort Javier Romero Otero
collection DOAJ
description Most widespread three-component penile prosthesis models are 700CX™ and Titan ® . Our purpose is to assess patient and partner satisfaction after the first implant. This is a multicenter, retrospective, nonrandomized study in which all patients who met the inclusion criteria between 2009 and 2013 were included. In total, 248 patients agreed to participate. To evaluate patient satisfaction, a validated but modified 11-question questionnaire was completed (EDITS); and a nonvalidated two-item questionnaire was given to the partner. Statistical analysis used an ordinal logistic regression model. Two hundred and forty-eight patients (194 with 700CX™ vs 54 with Titan®) and 207 couples completed the questionnaire (165 with 700CX™ vs 42 with Titan®). Overall satisfaction was high. Both showed great reliability for sexual intercourse and high compliance with prior expectations. Most patients were able to manage the penile prosthesis correctly within 6 months. Postoperative penile shortening led to some dissatisfaction in 42% and 46% of cases (700CX™ /Titan®). Significant differences were found in three questions of patients′ questionnaire. There were more patients satisfied with the 700CX™ (P = 0.0001). No patient with Titan® implant took longer than 6 months to optimal management. Only 4% of patients with 700CX™ implant were dissatisfied with the deflation, in contrast to 24% with the Titan® (P = 0.0031). Of the two partners′ questions, one showed a statistically significant difference (P = 0.0026). It seems that group 700CX™ would recommend to re-implant the prosthesis with a greater tendency. The overall satisfaction was very high for both prostheses. The final aspect of the erected and flaccid penis was satisfactory, but both groups showed significant discontent with its final size. Partners′ overall satisfaction was high.
first_indexed 2024-04-13T01:14:58Z
format Article
id doaj.art-ee5cd44cce7d492fa4c45ac3150c5f56
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1008-682X
1745-7262
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-13T01:14:58Z
publishDate 2017-01-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Asian Journal of Andrology
spelling doaj.art-ee5cd44cce7d492fa4c45ac3150c5f562022-12-22T03:09:00ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsAsian Journal of Andrology1008-682X1745-72622017-01-0119332132510.4103/1008-682X.172822Comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700CX and Titan penile prosthesesJavier Romero OteroCésar Rojas CruzBorja García GómezJoaquim Sarquella GeliJose Medina PoloEduard Ruiz CastañéAlfredo Rodríguez AntolínMost widespread three-component penile prosthesis models are 700CX™ and Titan ® . Our purpose is to assess patient and partner satisfaction after the first implant. This is a multicenter, retrospective, nonrandomized study in which all patients who met the inclusion criteria between 2009 and 2013 were included. In total, 248 patients agreed to participate. To evaluate patient satisfaction, a validated but modified 11-question questionnaire was completed (EDITS); and a nonvalidated two-item questionnaire was given to the partner. Statistical analysis used an ordinal logistic regression model. Two hundred and forty-eight patients (194 with 700CX™ vs 54 with Titan®) and 207 couples completed the questionnaire (165 with 700CX™ vs 42 with Titan®). Overall satisfaction was high. Both showed great reliability for sexual intercourse and high compliance with prior expectations. Most patients were able to manage the penile prosthesis correctly within 6 months. Postoperative penile shortening led to some dissatisfaction in 42% and 46% of cases (700CX™ /Titan®). Significant differences were found in three questions of patients′ questionnaire. There were more patients satisfied with the 700CX™ (P = 0.0001). No patient with Titan® implant took longer than 6 months to optimal management. Only 4% of patients with 700CX™ implant were dissatisfied with the deflation, in contrast to 24% with the Titan® (P = 0.0031). Of the two partners′ questions, one showed a statistically significant difference (P = 0.0026). It seems that group 700CX™ would recommend to re-implant the prosthesis with a greater tendency. The overall satisfaction was very high for both prostheses. The final aspect of the erected and flaccid penis was satisfactory, but both groups showed significant discontent with its final size. Partners′ overall satisfaction was high.http://www.ajandrology.com/article.asp?issn=1008-682X;year=2017;volume=19;issue=3;spage=321;epage=325;aulast=Oteroerectile dysfunction; penile implantation; penile prosthesis
spellingShingle Javier Romero Otero
César Rojas Cruz
Borja García Gómez
Joaquim Sarquella Geli
Jose Medina Polo
Eduard Ruiz Castañé
Alfredo Rodríguez Antolín
Comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700CX and Titan penile prostheses
Asian Journal of Andrology
erectile dysfunction; penile implantation; penile prosthesis
title Comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700CX and Titan penile prostheses
title_full Comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700CX and Titan penile prostheses
title_fullStr Comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700CX and Titan penile prostheses
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700CX and Titan penile prostheses
title_short Comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700CX and Titan penile prostheses
title_sort comparison of the patient and partner satisfaction with 700cx and titan penile prostheses
topic erectile dysfunction; penile implantation; penile prosthesis
url http://www.ajandrology.com/article.asp?issn=1008-682X;year=2017;volume=19;issue=3;spage=321;epage=325;aulast=Otero
work_keys_str_mv AT javierromerootero comparisonofthepatientandpartnersatisfactionwith700cxandtitanpenileprostheses
AT cesarrojascruz comparisonofthepatientandpartnersatisfactionwith700cxandtitanpenileprostheses
AT borjagarciagomez comparisonofthepatientandpartnersatisfactionwith700cxandtitanpenileprostheses
AT joaquimsarquellageli comparisonofthepatientandpartnersatisfactionwith700cxandtitanpenileprostheses
AT josemedinapolo comparisonofthepatientandpartnersatisfactionwith700cxandtitanpenileprostheses
AT eduardruizcastane comparisonofthepatientandpartnersatisfactionwith700cxandtitanpenileprostheses
AT alfredorodriguezantolin comparisonofthepatientandpartnersatisfactionwith700cxandtitanpenileprostheses