Table 1.

Summary of studies.

Author	Number of patients	Time of implant placement	Mean followup (yrs)	Satisfaction metrics	%
Bettochi et al. [7]	79	2004–2008	2.8	Frequent use of penile prosthesis	97
				Improvement in sex	92
				Would recommend surgery to others	97
Natali et al. [8]	33	1990–2004	5	Patient satisfaction	97
				Considerably met expectations	91
				Likelihood of continued use	97
				Lack of difficulty in use	91
				Confidence in having sex	91
				Assessment of partner satisfaction	91
				Feels partner wants continued use	97
				Same or improved hardness before ED	100
Brinkman et al. [9]	248	1992–1998	range: 2–8 years	Satisfied	69
				Satisfied or ambivalent	80
				Would have surgery again	80
				Would recommend surgery	84
Carson et al. [10]	207	1987–1996	7.2	Satisfied 4-5 on 5-point scale	76
				Erection suitable for sex	87
				Use at least twice monthly	79
				Recommend to friend/relative	88
Montorsi et al. [11]	200	1986–1997	4.9	Still having sex	93
				Satisfactory erections	98
				Satisfactory sexual activity	92
Holloway and Farah [12]	145	1990–1994	3.5	Overall satisfaction	85
				Sustained satisfaction	86
				Partner satisfaction	76
Goldstein et al. [13]	234	1989–1993	1.9	Fulfilled expectations	89
				Ability to have intercourse	83
				Confidence with intercourse	80
				Device rigidity	84
				Device function	84
				Recommend surgery	86
Garber [14]	50	Pre-1994	1.25	Satisfied with device	98
				Partner satisfied with device	96
				Would undergo procedure again	98
				Would recommend surgery	98
Goldstein et al. [15]	96	1989–1991	2.25	Fulfilled expectations	82
				Satisfaction 9 or better on 12-pt scale	77