Skip to main content
Sexual Medicine logoLink to Sexual Medicine
. 2021 Nov 22;10(1):100459. doi: 10.1016/j.esxm.2021.100459

ESSM Position Statement on Surgical Treatment of Peyronie's Disease

Daniar Osmonov 1,, Ahmed Ragheb 2, Sam Ward 3, Gideon Blecher 4, Marco Falcone 5, Armin Soave 6, Roland Dahlem 6, Koenraad van Renterghem 7, Nim Christopher 8, Georgios Hatzichristodoulou 9, Mirko Preto 5, Giulio Garaffa 8, Maarten Albersen 10, Carlo Bettocchi 11, Giovanni Corona 12, Yacov Reisman 13
PMCID: PMC8847818  PMID: 34823053

Abstract

Introduction

Patients with Peyronie's disease may experience significat distress. The choice of treatment depends on a variety of factors, including the stage of the disease, the presence of pain, severity and direction of the curvature, penile length and the quality of erectile function.

Aim

To review the evidence associated with surgical treatment of Peyronie`s Disease and provide clinical recommendations on behalf of the European Society for Sexual Medicine. 131 peer-reviewed studies and systematic reviews, which were published from 2009 to 2019 in the English language, were included.

Methods

MEDLINE, Google Scholar and EMBASE were searched for randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, open-label prospective and retrospective studies.

Main Outcome Measure

The panel provided statements on clinically relevant questions including patient involvement in the decision process, indications for surgery, choice of the approach, and the management of patient expectations. A comparison of the different grafts used in patients who have undergone plaque incision/excision and grafting in order to identify an ideal graft, has been carried out. The prevalence of postoperative complications has been summarized. Levels of evidence were provided according to the Oxford 2011 criteria and Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine recommendations.

Results

In order to allow shared decision making, a patient preoperative counselling regarding the pros and cons of each intervention is recommended. In particular, adverse effects of surgical treatments should be discussed to set realistic understanding and expectations of surgical outcomes and ultimately improve postoperative satisfaction rates. Surgical treatment should be only offered in the chronic phase of the condition, when the deformity and/or degree of erectile dysfunction, prevent patients from engaging in satisfying sexual interaction, or if the deformity is the cause of severe bother.

Conclusions

Current European Society for Sexual Medicine recommendations cover several aspects of Peyronie's disease treatment. These recommendations aim both to ensure patients and partners have accurate and realistic expectations of their treatment options, as well as to formulate algorithms to guide clinician management pathways.

Osmonov D, Ragheb A, Ward S et al, ESSM Position Statement on Surgical Treatment of Peyronie's Disease. Sex Med 2022;10:100459.

Key Words: Peyronie's Disease, Induratio Penis Plastica, Acquired Penile Deviation, Penile Length, Penile Graft, Plication, Disappointment, Dissatisfaction, Penile Prosthesis, Penile Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Peyronie's disease (PD) (Iduratio Penis Plastica) has been described in literature as early as the 1500s. It is noted in the works of the famous Italian anatomist Gabriel Fallopius, a pioneer in reproductive organs as well as by Andreas Vesalius, a 16th century Dutch Physician and author of one of the most influential books on Human anatomy De Humani Corporis Fabrica Libri Septem (On the Fabric of the Human Body).1 It was not until 1743, that Francois de la Peyronie, a surgeon of the Court of King Louise XV in France, outlined the disease in detail.2

PD is an acquired connective tissue disorder that is associated with the formation of fibrous/calcified inelastic plaques at the level of the tunica albuginea (TA) of the penis.3,4 The exact etiology of PD is unknown. The most accepted hypothesis is that in genetically prone individuals, trauma or repetitive microtrauma to the erect penis causes inflammation, degradation of the elastic fibers and fibrin deposition.5, 6, 7 This scarring process may lead to a variety of issues, including penile deformity and erectile dysfunction. Consequently, men with PD may experience significant distress; the extent of which does not necessarily correlate with the degree of curvature nor penile deformity. Psychological concerns regarding self-image, sexual appearance and sexual performance, low self-esteem, anxiety, depression and relationship problems may then further contribute to the psychogenic component of the erectile dysfunction (ED).8, 9, 10

Recent reports have shown that the prevalence of PD may be as high as 9%, but the true prevalence may be underreported.11 PD is associated with conditions including diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, ED, smoking and excessive alcohol consumption. It may also be present following local trauma or surgery such radical prostatectomy.12, 13, 14, 15 The choice of treatment depends on a variety of factors, including the stage of the disease, the presence of pain, severity and direction of the curvature, penile length and the quality of erectile function.11

In the early/acute stage of PD, non-surgical treatments aim to alleviate penile pain and minimise disease progression with stabilization of inflammation, plaque formation and penile deformity.16 In the late/chronic phase, surgical treatments may be required. These procedures include both penile shortening or penile lengthening types. Surgery aims to correct the curvature whilst maintaining satisfactory penile length and rigidity to enable penetrative sexual activity. Possible risks of surgery include penile shortening, ED, glans hypoaesthesia, residual or recurrent curvature and palpable or uncomfortable suture knots below the skin.11 To date, penile straightening surgery represents the gold standard for correction of the penile deformity, with subsequent relief of sexual distress.

The aim of this paper is to review the current evidence of surgical treatments for PD and provide official position statements with a series of guiding statements to manage patient's expectations and their clinical issues, on behalf of the European Society for Sexual Medicine (ESSM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Panel Identification

The scientific committee of the ESSM after ESSM executive committee (EC) approval, commissioned an expert task force of ESSM members expert of the topic. The final version of the manuscript was approved by EC and ESSM affiliated societies.

Literature Search and Study Eligibility

A MEDLINE, Google Scholar and EMBASE based literature search of original manuscripts published in English between 2009 and 2019 has been carried out using the following key words: “Peyronie`s Disease,” “induratio penis plastic,” “acquired penile deviation,” “acquired penile curvature,” “penile length,” “penile graft,” “tunical plication,” “patient expectations,” “partner expectations,” “cosmesis,” “disappointment,” “dissatisfaction,” “penile prosthesis,” “penile reconstruction,” “comorbidity,” “outcome,” “satisfaction.”

Data Extraction

Studies older than 10 years were included only if considered to be of great value to the topic with respect to the quality of the data. All subsequent articles were cross-referenced to ensure capturing of all relevant papers. Review articles and congenital curvature populations were excluded. Data was catalogued into study type, level of evidence, number of subjects, duration of follow-up, treatment arms and outcomes. Abstracts were reviewed by 5 different authors (D.O., A.R., S.W., G.B., M.F.). If it was not clear from the abstract whether the paper might contain relevant data, the full paper was assessed. Moreover, other studies relevant to the research question were retrieved from the reference lists of selected papers. Included studies were analyzed and summarized after an interactive peer-review process of the panel. All the data identified during the first analysis were checked in a second wave analysis by 4 of the authors (A.S., R.D., M.P., G.H.). Disagreements were resolved by consensus. All the authors adequately contributed to the analysis of the paper and reviewed the final version of the manuscript.

Review Methods

The panel provided statements on clinically relevant questions including patient's involvement in the decision process, indications for surgery, choice of the most suitable approach and management of patient expectations. A comparison of the different grafts used in patients who have undergone plaque incision and grafting (PIG) or partial plaque excision and grafting (PEG) has been carried out. The rates of postoperative complications with particular focus on sexual outcomes were analyzed. The statements were internally discussed and the level of evidence (LoE) was provided according to the Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence criteria; moreover, the quality of evidence was graded by applying the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine recommendations.17

PATIENT EXPECTATIONS

Statement #1: The treating clinician should adequately counsel patients before surgery. Benefits as well as side effects and complications of each surgical treatment should be discussed in detail with the patient to set realistic expectations towards surgical outcomes (Good clinical practice).

Statement #2: The treating clinician should thoroughly address psychological, emotional and relationship issues attributable to PD (Level 4, Grade C).

Evidence

One of the main goals of preoperative counselling is setting realistic patient's expectations by providing accurate information about each surgical option, widely discussing pros and cons of each procedure as well as any possible postoperative complication.18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 Without guidance patients may have unrealistic treatment outcome expectations. He must fully understand the progressive and generally irreversible nature of PD and that whilst non-surgical treatment options exists, they may not provide sufficient improvement to their deformities.25,26

Penile shortening due to PD is reported by more than 70% of patients prior to surgery.27 It is therefore paramount that patients are adequately counselled on the nature of the condition and regarding realistic expectations from surgery. Particular counselling points should include that treatments generally may not restore the penis to the premorbid dimensions.28,29 The patient should be informed regarding the pathophysiology of PD in general, as well as the extent of his condition in his specific case.

Since worsening of the quality of erections is one of the main causes of patient dissatisfaction,30 thorough patient counseling regarding the impact of the disease and each specific treatment option on erectile function is mandatory.31, 32, 33, 34

Due to the pain, deformity, loss of length and worsening of the quality of the erections, PD may not only severely impair sexual activity, but it can also affect emotional wellbeing, placing strain on relationships and have resulting broad psychological impact.35, 36, 37 Up to 48% of patients suffer from depression and this can be directly linked to the onset of PD38 while relationship issues and emotional distress related to this condition can be identified in 54% and 81% of cases respectively.39 PD seems to exert its sexual and psychological effects in 4 domains: physical appearance and self-image, sexual function and performance, PD-related pain and distress and social stigmatization and isolation.30,40,41 Investing time in psychological rehabilitation of the patient in the form of thorough counseling is therefore another key factor for overall patient satisfaction.

Remark

Only few studies have specifically evaluated patient expectations regarding surgery for PD. Addressing patient expectations before surgery in order to set realistic expectations towards surgical outcome must be a clinical principle for all physicians involved.

INDICATIONS FOR SURGICAL TREATMENT

General Considerations

Statement #3: Surgical treatment should only be performed in PD patients when the curvature and/or penile deformity and/or inadequate quality of erections do not allow satisfactory sexual intercourse, or when the deformity causes severe bother (Level 3, Grade C).

Statement #4: Surgery should only be performed in patients with stable disease for at least six to twelve months (Level 3, Grade C).

Statement #5: In penile surgery for PD, when adopting a subcoronal approach, circumcision is not necessary in selected patients with a normal, elastic prepuce (Level 3, Grade C).

Evidence

In patients with PD, a variety of surgical procedures, including tunical plication, plaque incision and grafting/plaque excision and grafting (PIG/PEG) techniques and penile prosthesis (PP) surgery, have been described. The aim of surgery is to improve penile deformities whilst minimizing any adverse outcomes. Surgeons should consider the extent of penile length loss, the degree and nature of the deformity as well as the quality of erections and patient preferences.42,43 Surgery for PD should be performed in patients with penile curvature and deformity which prevents satisfactory sexual intercourse, or when the deformity and worsening of the quality of erections is the cause of severe bother.

It is a generally accepted standard of care that surgery should only be performed in patients with stable disease for at least 6 months, in order to minimize the risk of subsequent disease progression and recurrence of the curvature.31, 32, 33, 34 The acute phase of the disease variate between 6 and 18 months, which after the stable disease phase of PD starts.44 It is widely accepted (recommendation strength rating: strong) that surgery should only be performed in case of stable disease for 6 months, which is usually the case after 12 months from the onset of symptoms.45

Various surgical approaches can be considered. Kadioglu and colleagues evaluated a large patient cohort of 268 patients whom underwent a variety of surgical procedures. 54 and 144 patients underwent plication or PIG surgery, whereas 70 patients with erectile dysfunction underwent PP implantation.46 Both surgical options were successful in terms of penile straightening in both short and long-term follow-up. Authors conclude that penile prosthesis implantation should be preferred for patients with ED and penile deformity.

A complete degloving of the penis is necessary in more complex cases and often for grafting procedures in order to gain full access to the corpora, neurovascular bundle and urethra, which can be achieved with a circumferential subcoronal incision.36 If it is the case, a circumcision is not always mandatory as necrosis, oedema or phimosis requiring a secondary circumcision in patients with a preexistent healthy elastic foreskin occurs as infrequently as 1% of cases, unless in re-do surgery where such issues may occur in up to 50% of cases.47,48

The specific PD surgical approaches will be discussed in the subsequent sections.

Tunical Plication (Shortening Procedures)

Statement #6: Tunical plication can be offered to reduce penile curvature in patients with PD (Level 3, Grade C).

Evidence

Plication procedures straighten the penis by reducing the longer, convex side of the penis, which is not affected by PD and are usually carried out at the point of maximum curvature. Currently the Nesbit technique and its modifications49 represents the most commonly used type of shortening procedure in patients with PD.50, 51, 52, 53 Other techniques include:

  • Yachia technique, which relies on the Heineke-Mikulicz principle54,55

  • Essed and Schroeder plication (TAP) without tunical excision56

  • 16-dot or 24-dot technique57

  • Baskin-Duckett (dual incision and plication) procedure35,58, 59, 60

The outcomes of plication procedures are summarized in Table 1. Complete straightening is achieved in 48-100% of with patient satisfaction rates ranging from 58% to 96%.48,53,59,61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67

Table 1.

Outcomes of shortening techniques for Peyronie's disease

Study Journal Surgical technique Study design Patients number Mean follow-up Penile straightness, (%) Suture-related issues, (%) Recurrent curvature, (%) Side effects (%) Overall satisfaction, (%)
Ralph et al, 199553 Journal of Urology Nesbit Retrospective 359 21 94
90
NA 6 Erectile dysfunction: 2
Penile shortening precluding sexual intercourse: 1.7
82
not stated
Rehman et al, 1997151 Journal of Urology Nesbit modification Retrospective 32 32 CPC 100
PDPC 73
NA CPCP 0
PDPC 7.7
Penile shortening: 23.1
Decreased penile sensation: 19.2
CPC 100
PDPC 78
Sassine et al 1994152 Urology Plication Not stated 55
Congenital 32
PD 23
120
not stated
95 NA 0 Scar perception: 18.2 95%
not stated
Geertsen et al 199659 British Journal of Urology Plication Not stated 28 34 42.9 17.9 Not stated Pain: 17.9
Persisting curvature: 57.1
54
Savoca et al 200064 International Journal of Impotence Research Nesbit Not stated 157 72 82.1 1.9 0 Penile shortening affecting sexual intercourse: 1.3
Erectile dysfunction: 12.7
87.9
Chahal et al 200166 British Journal of Urology International Corporal plication Not stated 69 4.1 Not stated 34 57 mild
14 severe
Significant penile shortening: 55
Numbness of the glans: 32
Not stated
Van der Horst et al 200460 British Journal of Urology International Essed-Schroeder Retrospective 50
28 PD
22 Congenital
30 100 Not stated Not stated Penile shortening: 74%
Impairment of penile sensibility: 28
Persisting curvature: 14
78
Lopes et al 201355 Urology Annals Yachia Retrospective 117 14 94.6 NA 19.6 Glans hyposthesia: 8
Penile shortening concerning sexual intercourse: 2.6
88.4
Rolle et al, 200563 Journal of Urology modified corporoplasty procedure involving plication suture on the convex aspect of the penis before tunica albuginea resection Retrospective 50
32 Congenital
18 PD
12
14
100 NA 0 Mild decrease skin sensibility:
Congenital 40
PD 60
Penile shortening: 78
94
Friedrich et al, 2000149 British Journal of Urology International Essed-Schroeder Retrospective 31
(19 CPC, 12 PDPC)
22 52
48 (residual curvature)
Not stated
CPC 3
PDPC 0
CPC 5.3
PDPC 8.3
Not stated
Penile shortening: 19
Pain: 26
Numbness: 6.5
Impaired rigidity: 19
CPC 94.7
PDPC 58.3
81
Gholami et Lue, 200257 Journal of Urology 16-dot Retrospective 132 30 85
93
12 15 Penile shortening affecting sexual activity: 7
Narrowing of the penis: 9
Decrease in penile sensation: 6
Peniel hematoma: 4
Penile pain: 1
Worsening of erectile function: 6
96
Schultheiss et al 200067 European Urology Essed Retrospective 61
(40 CPC
21PDPC)
40 70
not stated
42.8
32.8
29.5
(22.5 CPC
42.9 PDPC)
Erectile dysfunction: 3.3
Penile shortening: 45.9
NA
Greenfield et al 200658 Journal of Urology Tunica albuginea plication Not stated 102
(PD (68)
chordee (34)
29 99 NA 7
0.9
Penile shortening: PD 7.3, Chordee 2.9
Decreased rigidity: PD 7.3, Chordee 0
Decreased sensation: PD 4.4, Chordee 2.9
PD 98.5
Chordee 100

CDC = Congenital penile curvature; PDPC = Peyronie's disease penile curvature.

Remarks

Whilst plication techniques lead to encouraging surgical outcomes and adequate patient satisfaction rates in the vast majority of patients, relevant side effects may also occur. Unfortunately, adequate studies comparing surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction among specific techniques are lacking and the main limitations for studies of penile plication include their retrospective nature, the low number of patients and the limited follow-up duration.

Grafting Procedures

Statement #7: Grafting techniques can be offered to improve penile curvature and correct penile deformity in selected patients with PD including those with preservation of erectile quality, curvature of more than 60 degrees, ossified plaque, significant waist deformity, or when plication surgery may potentially cause loss of more than 20% of overall penile length (Level 3, Grade C).

Statement #8: The use of Dacron TM and Gore-Tex TM for grafting in penile surgery for PD should be strongly discouraged (Level 3, Grade C).

Evidence

Grafting techniques are characterized by a relaxing incision of the TA of the corpora cavernosa carried out at the point of maximum curvature on the concave side of the penis. The penis is then straightened and the defect of the TA covered with a graft. Although an existing plaque can be either incised or excised, it is commonly accepted to minimize the extent of plaque excision as there is a direct correlation between size of the tunical defect and extent of the worsening of the quality of erection postoperatively.31,35,36,51

The main reason why surgeons opt for PIG/PEG techniques in patients with curvature of more than 60°, is that a plication type procedure may lead to penile shortening. Some authors argue that the shortening has been already caused by PD itself and that plication surgery would therefore not cause further significant shortening.3 PIG/PEG procedures also facilitate correction of more severe indentations and hourglass deformities.

It is mandatory to ascertain the quality of erection prior to offering a PIG/PEG procedure as the erectile quality may deteriorate following surgery. Adequate erections in the postoperative phase may help prevent graft contracture.

Various tunical incision types exist for PIG/PEG. A simple transverse plaque incision at the point of maximal curvature may be sufficient in most cases. Other cases (eg, when associated with an hourglass deformity), may benefit either from a modified “H”-incision or a double-Y incision of the tunica albuginea as the preferred choice.68,69 Partially excising a small ellipsoid of the plaque at the maximal curvature point with 2 lateral line extensions is another justified option.22,35,70 No TA incision type has proven to be superior over others.71

A variety of grafts are now available to the reconstructive surgeon, including autologous grafts, allografts, synthetic grafts and xenografts. The distribution of graft materials based on the reviewed evidence is summarized in Table 2. There is ongoing debate regarding the best available graft choice, although the ideal version should be readily available, cheap, resistant to infection, minimize loss of erectile function and contracture and should not promote significant inflammatory reactions.36 No comparative studies comparing graft type and suturing materials with surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction have been published. The relevant prospective and retrospective studies reporting clinical outcomes as well as patient satisfaction of the grafting procedure based on the different graft types are summarized in (Table 4).

Table 2.

Distribution of grafting materials

Grafting materials
Autologous grafts
Dermis
Buccal mucosa
Fascia lata
Lingual mucosa
Tunica albuginea
Tunica vaginalis
Vein
Non-autologous grafts (allografts)
Human amniotic membrane
Human dermis
Human dura mater
Human fascia lata
Human pericardium
Non-autologous grafts (xenografts)
Bovine pericardium
Bovine dermis (Xenform)
Equine collagen fleece (Tachosil)
Porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS)
Porcine dermis
Synthetic Grafts
Dacron
Gore-Tex

Table 4.

Side to side comparison of surgical outcomes of current grafting techniques

Surgical outcomes %:
Study Year Journal Study type Graft type Patients (n) Penile straightening PO ED Penile shortening Overall pat. satisfaction
Rosenhammer et al81 2019 Int J Imp Research

Retrospective
SIS and TachoSil
43 and 43
86 and 95
7 and 5 28 and 5 86 and 95
Morgado et al92 2018 Andrology
Prospective
SIS
32
75
53.8 65.6 87.5
Hatzichristodoulou80 2018 Int J Imp Research
Prospective
TachoSil
12
83.3 8.3 NA 91.7
Sayedahmed et al82 2017 World J Urol Prospective
SIS
43
74.4 11.6 27.9 86
Valente et al84
2017 Urology Prospective
SIS
28
82 36 14.3 82
Caraceni et al
2016 Urology Prospective
Xenform
28
75 25 NA 87.5
Khawaja et al137 2016 Urology Annals Prospective
Dermis and temporalis fascia
13 and 20
100 9 NA 91
Cosentino et al87 2016 Int J Imp Research
Retrospective
SIS
44
NA 5 NA NA
Otero et al93
2017 Asian J Andrology
Prospective
Pericardium
43
80.5 25 None 85.4
Wimpissinger et al92 2016 J Sex Med Pros/Retro
Vein 30
86 36 43 73
Zucchi et al105
2015 Urology Retrospective
Buccal mucosa 32
96 4 NA 85
Hatzichristodoulou
et al22
2013 Int J Imp Research
Prospective
TachoSil
63
83 NA NA NA
Kozacioglu et al20 2012 Urology Retrospective
Derm
38
92 34 NA NA
Da Ros et al141 2012 IBJU
Retrospective
Tunica albuginea
33
90 24 18 90
Sansalone et al21 2011 Asian J Andrology
Retrospective
Pericardium
157
88 29 None 97
Staerman et al83 2010 Int J Imp Research
Retrospective
SIS
33
67 11 25 79
Chung et al86 2011 J Sex Med
Retrospective
Dermis, Pericardium and SIS
20,33 and 33
68 67 22 <35
Kadıoğlu et al46 2018 J Sex Med Retrospektive Saphenous vein 144 87.5 33.3 N/A 75

Autologous grafts require an additional surgical incision and surgical time.36 Among the autologous grafts, saphenous vein has shown promising results.35,72, 73, 74, 75, 76 More recently, oral mucosa graft (buccal or lingual) has been evaluated in a few trials (Table 4 and 5).

Table 5.

Follow up after grafting techniques

Technique Patients Median follow-up (mo) Grafting material Curvature recurrence(%) Revision surgery (%)
Sansalone et al 201183 157 20 Pericardium N/A N/A
Breyer et al 200785 19 15 SIS 37 6
Knoll et al 200188 12 12 SIS 8.3 8.3
Kovac et al 200790 36 22 Dermis
Tutoplast
StrataSIS
40
0
33.1
N/A
Montorsi et al 2000107 50 32 Vein 6 N/A
Chung et al 201186 86 98 Dermis, Pericardium, SIS 50–87 67
Hatzichristodoulou 2016162
319
47
Collagene Fleece
0
N/A
Kadıoğlu 201846 144 51.1 sapheneous vein
16.4 N/A

Cadaveric fascia lata and pericardium demonstrates encouraging results with complete straightening of the penis and high patient satisfaction rates.23,77,78 Dermal grafts are associated with higher rate of long-term failure79 (Table 4). Due to considerable risk of infection, inflammatory reactions, contracture, fibrosis and allergic reaction, Dacron and Gore-Tex grafts are no longer used as a grafting material in PD36 Table 3.

Table 3.

Distribution of grafting materials among reviewed studies

Type of graft Total studies (n) Total subjects (n) Mean operative times (min) Mean follow up (mo) Mean satisfaction (%)
Small intestine submucosa (SIS) 7 256 136.2 39.6 79.9
Collagen fleece (CF) (TachoSil) 5 438 88.05 26.3 91.5
Pericardium 3 233 NA 17 91.2
Tunica Vaginalis 2 24 79 >12 100
Dermal graft 3 71 >130 60.5 <35
Dermal flap 1 26 NA 95 40.9
Tunica Albuginea 1 33 NA 41 90
Buccal mucosa 1 32 NA 43 85
Lingual mucosa 1 17 130 15 94
Vein 1 30 NA 156 73
Fascia lata 1 9 NA 18 89
Temporal fascia 1 20 120 24 91
Xenoform 1 28 155 31.8 87.5

A self-adhesive collage fleece was proposed as grafting alternative. The main advantage was the unnecessary suturing and the significant reduction in operative time.22 This innovative approach proved to be reliable leading to satisfactory outcomes: a complete straightening of the penis in 83% of cases, 8% of patients experienced worsening of erectile function postoperatively and 92% of patients were satisfied with surgical outcome.80 Intraoperatively, caution must be paid in order not to overfill the penis during artificial erection, after applying the collagen fleece. However, an artificial erection test, after applying the collagen fleece, of about 70–80% may be sufficient to check for residual curvature. Although many experts recognize the need for a full rigid erection to assess a possible residual curvature. A recent comparative study revealed the reduced operative time with self-adhesive collage fleece over the sub intestinal submucosa (SIS), whilst maintaining comparable outcomes81 (Table 5). Among the different graft materials, recent evidence highlights collagen fleece graft as a possibility, although long term outcomes regarding functional and anatomical outcome of grafting procedures remains to be proven.

SIS currently represents one of the more commonly used xenografts in PD surgery.36,50,30,81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 Another option is bovine or human pericardium, which has been used for many years with adequate results.21,93 Outcomes are summarized in (Table 45). Overall, complete straightening was obtained in 67–88% of patients with satisfaction rates of 79–87%.

Remarks

There are insufficient studies comparing surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction for each type of graft. The vast majority of studies regarding PIG/PEG for PD are retrospective, include a low number of patients and have limited follow-up (Table 5).

Penile Prosthesis

Statement #9: Penile prosthesis implantation is reserved for PD patients with refractory ED or distal flaccidity not responding to pharmacologic treatment or those with complex deformities that would otherwise require PIG/PEG procedures (Level 3, Grade C).

Statement #10: Additional procedures including modeling, tunical plication, plaque incision/excision and/or grafting are performed when penile deformity and/or penile curvature persist following penile prosthesis implantation (Level 3, Grade C).

Statement #11: Inflatable prostheses are associated with superior results in terms curvature correction, rigidity, girth restoration and concealability than their semirigid counterpart in patients with PD (Level 4, Grade C)

Evidence

Patients with <30° curvature may be treated with cylinder insertion alone not requiring any additional modeling, plication or grafting. This is because a curvature of less than 30° should usually not interfere with penetrative sexual intercourse and the curve will progressively correct itself.33,35 When the curvature exceeds 30° and is not ventral, manual modeling over the implanted inflated cylinders may result in sufficient straightening of the penis. If after 2 attempts of modelling the curvature remains greater than 30°, additional maneuvers should be considered to optimize straightening. Further curvature correction can be achieved either by lengthening the shorter side of the shaft with relaxing tunical incisions or by shortening the longer side with plications. Since plications induce overall shortening, while relaxing incisions tend to restore part of the length lost due to PD contracture, the latter should be strongly considered as penile length represents one of the main determinants of patient satisfaction after PP implantation.35 Penile prosthesis surgery allows penile straightening and correction of penile deformity in 84–100% of patients, and 79% of patients are satisfied with the surgical outcome in reported series.31,94, 95, 96, 97, 98 Although further comparative studies are required, the outcomes of penile implant in this context are encouraging. Real or perceived loss of penile length plays a major role in patient satisfaction following surgery; a number of techniques have been described to restore length lost to PD contracture and corporeal fibrosis. The sliding-technique, circumferential grafting and multiple incision techniques (MIST) as well as Egydio`s multiple-slit technique (MUST) have been described. Overall, a median penile length gain of 3 cm was found in several series.99, 100, 101, 102

Remark

Evidence regarding PP implantation outcomes in PD patients is poor and mainly derived by retrospective studies with small number of patients and limited follow-up.

POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS

Statement #12: In select cases, complications may be managed successfully with revision surgery, including delayed PP implantation in patients who have developed de novo refractory ED. (Level 4, Grade C)

Evidence

Potential adverse events related to PD surgery include: de novo ED, worsening of preexisting ED, curvature recurrence, glans hypoesthesia, palpable sutures/material and graft bulging. The evidence related to all these aspects will be analyzed in the following sections.

De Novo ED

The mechanism for de novo ED are multifactorial, with the main contributers involving disruption of the veno-occlusive mechanism in the case of PIG/PEG procedures and neurovascular bundle damage during its extensive mobilization. It should be also recognized that psychogenic factors due to the underlying deformities, ED and potentially as a result of circumcision, may also play a role.103

Erectile function outcomes are frequently reported using global satisfaction score or non-validated questionnaires (eg, IIEF score, which is not currently validated for PD).21,86,104,105 This represents a major limitation of the current outcome literature.

Preoperative artificial erection test can provide more objective information to determine the most appropriate surgical option. Assuming a background of ED, in cases of very poor erectile response to high dose injection, the surgeon may give further consideration towards PP implantation.52 Nocturnal penile tumescence tests have also been described as a form of assessment of erectile capacity, although its use in PD populations is less clear.106, 107, 108 Although standardized values to guide treatment choice are not available, dynamic color duplex doppler ultrasound (CDDU) of the penis should be considered during evaluation prior to surgical interventions for treating PD, among others potentially for medicolegal purposes.109 Certain comorbidities associated with 1 or more risk factor(s) may prompt further hemodynamic investigation and in selected cases this can be followed by an invasive penile angiographic evaluation. An standardized algorithm for preoperative evaluation has been suggested by Sikka et al,109 however with the lack of standardized values, its role is yet to be clarified.

The rates of ED are much more frequent following PIG/PEG,23,110 compared to plication techniques. The incidence of postoperative ED after grafting procedures is summarized in (Table 4).

Residual or Recurrent Curvature (ReC)

Residual curvature at the conclusion of surgery may be acceptable if of minimal magnitude. If excessive however, it may be considered poor surgical technique and patient dissatisfaction may result. ReC is identified when a surgically straightened penis becomes curved once again, at any point post procedure. This may be due to scarring or progression of PD. Whilst residual curvature and ReC represent separate issues, they are often not distinguished in reported outcomes, with rates following shortening procedures ranging between 0.5% and 55%.23,66,111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116 ReC rates following PIG procedures range from 0% to 33%, but these figures may not include patients with mild non-problemtatic curvatures.61,73,83,86,88,114,117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122 Whilst the degree of ReC is usually not severe, uncommonly some patients may experience recurrent curvature as significant as 70° and revision surgery may be necessary in up to 22% of ReC cases.88,123, 124, 125

Glans Hypoesthesia

A temporary or permanent reduction in glans sensation is a well-recognized complication of penile straightening surgery and it is universally accepted that neuropraxia plays an important role in this. Infiltration of Peyronie's plaque into the neurovascular bundle structures has also been postulated as a possible cause.126 Although most papers assess sensitivity by directly questioning patients, some utilize more objective forms of measurements such as biothesiometry.89,127 Glans hypoesthesia has been reported in up to 53% of cases following plication surgery.57,66,75,128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133 It is mild in 50%66 of cases and up to 29% report a complete resolution over 11–49 months follow up.66,128 Approximately 21% of patients report loss of glans sensation following a Nesbit plication.61,134 Glans hypoesthesia has been reported in up to 39% of patients who have undergone PIG.21,22,61,75,78,79,83,86,89,93,107,109,120, 121, 122,124,125,135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141 This complication appears to be transient, with resolution within 12 months from surgery in up to 100% of cases.61,109,119,127,135,136,138,140

Palpable or Uncomfortable Sutures and Graft

Palpable lumps are reported by up to 71%57,66,128,131,134 after plication procedures. Following grafting procedures, suture knots/graft material are reported to be palpable in up to 50% of cases120,121,142 although they seem to only be painful in 4–6% of patients.121

Bulge/Ballooning or Indentation Deformities

Although typically as a result of grafting, such deformities may also arise following plication procedures with larger dog-ears causing accentuation of waisting. Overall, they are reported in 9–16.7% according to current evidence.57,134 This complication can be noted also after grafting procedures. Ballooning of the grafts has been noted in up to 12.5%. Severe indentation was noted in up to 3% of patients.93,118,121,135,143

Glans Ischemia/Necrosis

Glans necrosis (GN) is defined as ischemia to the glans penis due to compromised blood flow. This complication represents the most feared by surgeons and is a dreadful outcome from the patient's and surgeon's perspectives. Most urologists tend to encounter GN following a sliding technique for penile lengthening.144 This issue has never been reported after plication procedures, but it must be considered after grafting procedures were it can be found in up to 2.4% of cases.93,107 GN may occur even during regular PP implantation.

Typical presentation begins with a dusky glans during the first hours following penile surgery. Anatomically the glans penis is supplied by a rich anastomotic network of end arteries derived from the terminal branches of the dorsal penile artery as well as tributaries from the bulbourethral artery new reference.144 Glans ischemia is therefore more likely on a background of preexisting systemic condition. The same predisposition to peripheral vascular disease has been identified as risk factors for this complication. The majority of cases have occurred in patients with diabetes mellitus, smoking, metabolic syndrome, chronic renal failure, end-stage atherosclerosis as well as previous irradiation and implant revision cases.145,146

Interestingly with no evidence of severe arterial insufficiency on performing a preoperative penile duplex in these patients, one could not predict such a complication. Fortunately, although likely under-reported, GN seems to be a rare complication following PD surgery. Wilson et al reported a collective cohort series of 21 patients undergoing PP surgery, combining the clinical experience of 9 high volume PP implanters.144 This paper provides evidence of IPP-associated GN with practical recommendations on how to identify “high risk” patients. Unfortunately, there is currently no comparable guidelines regarding GN in patients undergoing PD/grafting surgery.

Remark

The lack of prospective randomized controlled trials on the outcome of PD surgery significantly limits the interpretation of data. The vast majority of series in the literature either are retrospective or prospective observational studies. The primary endpoints are frequently based on patient and clinician subjective evaluation. Validated questionnaires are rarely applied. IIEF questionnaire is frequently used, although not validated for PD.

DIFFICULT SALVAGE CASES: MANAGEMENT OF RECURRENT DEVIATION FOLLOWING PLICATION, GRAFTING, OR INTRALESIONAL INJECTION TREATMENTS

Statement #13: None of the straightening procedures currently available has proven superior with regards to preventing curvature recurrence (Level 3, Grade C)

Statement #14: Surgical curvature correction after Collagenase Clostridium Histolyticum (CCH) injection is possible without significant increase in postoperative complications (Level 4, Grade C)

Statement #15: Postoperative rehabilitation programs may reduce the risk of penile curvature recurrence and shortening (Level 4, Grade C)

Statement #16: When necessary, revision surgery should be carried out at least 6 months after the initial procedure to allow for complete healing and stabilization of the deformity and for adequate assessment of postoperative erectile function (Level 4, Grade C)

Statement #17: Penile prosthesis implantation alone or in combination with straightening maneuvers can be considered during revision surgery, in order to minimize further penile length loss or to avoid worsening of erectile function (Level 4, Grade C)

Statement #18: The use of collagen fleece as a graft material following plaque incision can be contemplated in revision surgery (Level 4, Grade C)

Evidence

Among possible complications of plication corporoplasty, ReC is among the more concerning ones. The presence of strong erections postoperatively may potentially weaken or tear the plication sutures on the tunica albuginea. RC that appears at a later stages more likely related to disease progression rather than to surgical failure.130 Among plication procedures, the risk of postoperative RC may range from 0% to 19%.53,55,57,58,63,65,67,147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153,130 RC is more likely to occur in grafting, compared to plication procedures. The incidence of RC after PIG may range from 50% to 78% of cases.22,80,81,154 Among the different graft materials, recent evidence highlight collagen fleece graft as promising, without any cases of RC registered in the follow-up.22,80,81,154

In 2013, the clinical efficacy and safety of CCH injection for PD was confirmed after the conclusion of IMPRESS I and II trials.155 Despite the efficacy of intralesional CCH for PD, some patients may have persistent penile curvature requiring subsequent straightening procedure. Surgical correction of persistent or residual curvature following CCH injection was recently investigated by Levine et al and Delay et al.156,157 The 2 studies included a total of 17 patients with persistent or residual curvature after CCH and all were managed with straightening procedures such as tunical plication, PIG and/or penile prosthesis implantation. The average preoperative penile curvature was 53.8° (range 35°–70°). Postoperatively, all patients but 1 patient reported a functionally straight penis (curvature <20°). There were no reported significant anatomical changes nor complications secondary to prior CCH treatment. Delay et al found more fibrotic tissue in those patients (3/10) whom underwent surgery within 2–3 months from the last CCH injection. No significant differences in postoperative complication rates were recorded when compared to the same surgical procedures in PD patients who had not undergone previous CCH treatment.

Thus with limited evidence available, it appears that previous intralesional CCH injection should not necessarily preclude patients from undergoing subsequent surgical correction of residual curvature; however, it may slightly increase intraoperative difficulty if surgery is offered within the first 3 months from the last CCH injection.158

In cases of ReC following plication or grafting procedures, no clear recommendations can be provided due to a paucity of available data regarding the decision to perform revision surgery. It is generally agreed that revision surgery should be postponed for at least 6 months to allow for normal healing to occur and to assess whether a new deformity or de-novo ED develops.35 During this period, patients may be advised to perform some version of penile rehabilitation to potentially reduce the progression of any recurrent penile curvature. Penile rehabilitation can include graft massage and/or penile traction therapy.20,159, 160, 161 Until a standard protocol for postoperative rehabilitation is established, experts in the field continue to advise their patients based on personal experience and opinion supported by contemporary studies. Similar to PP implantation, after PD grafting surgery, patients are advised to abstain from sexual intercourse and sexual activities for a period of 4–6 weeks.21,43,86,162 Postoperative rehabilitation programs may reduce the risk of penile curvature recurrence and shortening.3,25,43,70,80,162,163

In cases of severe ReC, PP implantation may represent a definitive solution; preventing further shortening whilst providing the necessary rigidity for penetrative intercourse.164,165

The modeling maneuver, to manually bend the penis to the opposite side of the curvature with the implant inflated, was described in 1994.166 The main concern with this technique is the low risk of urethral perforation, described in 4–5% of cases. This complication would lead to abortion of the procedure.2,167 The modeling maneuver is not indicated in severe and complex penile deformities and when performed, may not completely straighten the penis.

In select cases characterized by severe penile shortening, tunical incision with or without grafting could be considered in order to optimize postoperative penile length in patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation.168,169 Whilst this is typically addressed via a sub-coronal incision, a non-degloving technique with ventral incision provides for an alternative method for graft and penile prosthesis placement to maintain dartos and skin continuity to the glans penis while still allowing for adequate surgical exposure.170

When performing an inflatable PP and tunical incision for ReC, a graft is recommended if the tunical defect is greater than 2 cm in order to minimize the risk of cylinder herniation.140,171,172 If a malleable prosthesis is implanted, tunical grafting could be avoided provided adequate hemostasis has been achieved.97,173

In the rare event of a tunical aneurysm, revision surgery including excision of the dilated tunical segment and followed by grafting may be considered.174

CONCLUSIONS

Although surgery represents the gold standard treatment of PD, it remains far from perfect, despite numerous technique modifications, development of various grafts and rehabilitation protocols. The main surgical limitation is that it does not repair the damage produced by PD and may not completely restore the penis to the original dimensions and function. Current literature lacks large volumes of prospective series, hindering our ability to scientifically compare the techniques and their outcomes.

A multinational, multicenter prospective registry of PD surgery procedures may contribute to the evidence-based knowledge on the indications, procedures, and possible complications of PD treatment modalities.

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

Daniar Osmonov: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing-Original Draft, Revisions; Ahmed Ragheb: Investigation; Sam Ward: Investigation, Revisions; Gideon Blecher: Methodology, Writing-Original Draft; Marco Falcone: Methodology, Writing-Original Draft; Armin Soave: Investigation, Writing-Original Draft; Roland Dahlem: Writing-Review & Editing; Koenraad van Renterghem: Writing-Review & Editing; Nim Christopher: Writing-Original Draft; Georgios Hatzichristodoulou: Supervision; Mirko Preto: Writing-Original Draft; Giulio Garaffa: Writing-Original Draft, Supervision; Maarten Albersen: Writing-Review & Editing, Supervision; Carlo Bettocchi: Writing-Review & Editing, Supervision; Giovanni Corona: Conceptualization, Writing-Review & Editing, Supervision, Revisions; Yacov Reisman: Conceptualization, Writing-Review & Editing, Supervision, Revisions.

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest: Gideon Blecher, Nim Christopher and Georgios Hatzichristodoulou are consultants of Coloplast Porgés. Roland Dahlem, Giulio Garaffa and Armin Soave are consultants of Boston Scientific. Koenraad van Renterghem and Carlo Bettocchi are consultants of Coloplast Porgés, Boston Scientific. Daniar Osmonov is consultant of Coloplast Porgés, Fidelis. Sam Ward is a consultant for P&G Health, Europe. Yacov Reisman is a consultant of Besins Health Care. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest.

Funding: None.

References

  • 1.Vesalius A., van Calcar J.S., Oporinus J., et al. Vol. 1543. M D XLIII; 1543. De humani corporis fabrica libri septem. (Basileae Ex Off Ioannis Oporini). [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Wilson S.K., Cleves M.A., Delk J.R. Long-term followup of treatment for Peyronie's disease: Modeling the penis over an inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol. 2001 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66537-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ralph D., Gonzalez-Cadavid N., Mirone V., et al. The Management of Peyronie's disease: Evidence-based 2010 guidelines. J Sex Med. 2010;7:2359–2374. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.01850.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bella A.J., Perelman M.A., Brant W.O., et al. Peyronie's disease (CME) J Sex Med. 2007;4:1527–1538. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00614.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Devine C.J., Somers K.D., Jordan G.H., et al. Proposal: Trauma as the cause of the Peyronie's lesion. J Urol. 1997;157:285–290. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65361-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Gonzalez-Cadavid N.F., Rajfer J. Mechanisms of Disease: New insights into the cellular and molecular pathology of Peyronie's disease. Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2005;2:291–297. doi: 10.1038/ncpuro0201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Smith J.F., Walsh T.J., Conti S.L., et al. Risk factors for emotional and relationship problems in Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2008;5:2179–2184. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00949.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Nelson C.J., Diblasio C., Kendirci M., et al. The chronology of depression and distress in men with Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2008;5:1985–1990. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00895.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Rosen R., Catania J., Lue T., et al. Impact of Peyronie's disease on sexual and psychosocial functioning: Qualitative findings in patients and controls. J Sex Med. 2008;5:1977–1984. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00883.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Gelbard M.K., Dorey F., James K. The natural history of Peyronie's disease. J Urol. 1990;144:1376–1379. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)39746-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Garaffa G., Trost L.W., Serefoglu E.C., et al. Understanding the course of Peyronie's disease. Int J Clin Pract. 2013;67:781–788. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.12129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kadioglu A., Tefekli A., Erol B., et al. A retrospective review of 307 men with peyronie's disease. J Urol. 2002;168:1075–1079. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64578-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Tal R., Heck M., Teloken P., et al. Peyronie's disease following radical prostatectomy: Incidence and predictors. J Sex Med. 2010;7:1254–1261. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01655.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Hatzimouratidis, K.I. Eardley, F. Giuliano, I. et al. Guidelines on penile curvature. European Association of Urology; 2015. [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 15.Rhoden E.L., Riedner C.E., Fuchs S.C., et al. A cross-sectional study for the analysis of clinical, sexual and laboratory conditions associated to Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2010;7:1529–1537. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01584.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Gur S., Limin M., Hellstrom W.J.G. Current status and new developments in Peyronie's disease: Medical, minimally invasive and surgical treatment options. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2011;12:931–944. doi: 10.1517/14656566.2011.544252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Jeremy Howick, Iain Chalmers, Paul Glasziou, et al. The 2011 Oxford CEBM levels of evidence 2011.
  • 18.Walsh T.J., Hotaling J.M., Lue T.F., et al. How curved is too curved? the severity of penile deformity may predict sexual disability among men with Peyronie's disease. Int J Impot Res. 2013;25:109–112. doi: 10.1038/ijir.2012.48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Hatzichristodoulou G. Grafting techniques for Peyronie's disease. Transl Androl Urol. 2016;5:334–341. doi: 10.21037/tau.2016.03.16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Kozacioglu Z., Degirmenci T., Gunlusoy B., et al. Effect of tunical defect size after peyronie's plaque excision on postoperative erectile function: Do centimeters matter? Urology. 2012;80:1051–1055. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.07.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Sansalone S., Garaffa G., Djinovic R., et al. Long-term results of the surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease with Egydio's technique: A European multicentre study. Asian J Androl. 2011;13:842–845. doi: 10.1038/aja.2011.42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Hatzichristodoulou G., Gschwend J.E., Lahme S. Surgical therapy of Peyronie's disease by partial plaque excision and grafting with collagen fleece: Feasibility study of a new technique. Int J Impot Res. 2013;25:183–187. doi: 10.1038/ijir.2013.7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Taylor F.L., Levine L.A. Surgical correction of peyronie's disease via Tunica Albuginea plication or partial plaque excision with pericardial graft: Long-Term follow Up. J Sex Med. 2008;5:2221–2228. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00941.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kueronya V., Miernik A., Stupar S., et al. International multicentre psychometric evaluation of patient-reported outcome data for the treatment of Peyronie's disease. BJU Int. 2015 doi: 10.1111/bju.12968. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Levine L.A., Burnett A.L. Standard operating procedures for Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2013;10:230–244. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.03003.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Martinez D., Ercole C.E., Hakky T.S., et al. Peyronie's disease: Still a surgical disease. Adv Urol 2012. 2012 doi: 10.1155/2012/206284. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Farrell M.R., Corder C.J., Levine L.A. Peyronie's disease among men who have sex with men: Characteristics, treatment, and psychosocial factors. J Sex Med. 2013;10:2077–2083. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kadioglu A., Akman T., Sanli O., et al. Surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease: A critical analysis. Eur Urol. 2006;50:235–248. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.04.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kaminetsky J., Gittelman M., Kaufman G.J., et al. Patient perspectives on Peyronie's disease: results of poststudy interviews from a phase 2 trial of collagenase clostridium histolyticum. Int J Impot Res. 2019;31:263–268. doi: 10.1038/s41443-018-0027-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Soave A., Laurich S., Dahlem R., 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. doi: 10.3390/jcm8081121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bella A.J., Lee J.C., Grober E.D., et al. 2018 canadian urological association guideline for peyronie's disease and congenital penile curvature. Can Urol Assoc J. 2018;12:E197–E209. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.5255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Chughtai B., Lee R.K., Te A.E., et al. Metabolic syndrome and sexual dysfunction. Curr Opin Urol. 2011;21:514–518. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32834b8681. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Hatzimouratidis K., Montorsi F., Eardley I., et al. Guidelines on male sexual dysfunction: Erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation. Eur Urol. 2010 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.02.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Nehra A., Alterowitz R., Culkin D.J., et al. Peyronie's disease: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2015;194:745–753. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.05.098. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Chung E., Ralph D., Kagioglu A., et al. Evidence-based management guidelines on peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2016;13:905–923. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.04.062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Hatzichristodoulou G., Osmonov D., Kübler H., et al. Contemporary review of grafting techniques for the surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease. Sex Med Rev. 2017;5:544–552. doi: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.01.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Hellstrom W.J.G., Feldman R., Rosen R.C., et al. Bother and distress associated with peyronie's disease: Validation of the Peyronie's disease questionnaire. J Urol. 2013;190:627–634. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.01.090. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Nelson C.J., Diblasio C., Kendirci M., et al. The chronology of depression and distress in men with Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2008;5:1985–1990. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00895.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Smith J.F., Walsh T.J., Conti S.L., et al. Risk factors for emotional and relationship problems in Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2008;5:2179–2184. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00949.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Rosen R., Catania J., Lue T., et al. Impact of Peyronie's disease on sexual and psychosocial functioning: Qualitative findings in patients and controls. J Sex Med. 2008;5:1977–1984. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00883.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Nelson C.J., Mulhall J.P. Psychological impact of Peyronie's disease: A review. J Sex Med. 2013;10:653–660. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02999.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Capoccia E., Levine L.A. Contemporary review of Peyronie's disease treatment. Curr Urol Rep. 2018;19 doi: 10.1007/s11934-018-0800-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Levine L.A., Larsen S.M. Surgery for Peyronie's disease. Asian J Androl. 2013;15:27–34. doi: 10.1038/aja.2012.92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Di Maida F., Cito G., Lambertini L., et al. The natural history of Peyronie's disease. World J Mens Health. 2020;38 doi: 10.5534/wjmh.200065. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Salonia A., Bettocchi C., Carvalho J., et al. EAU guidelines on sexual and reproductive health 2021.
  • 46.Kadıoğlu A., Salabaş E., Özmez A., et al. Peyronie's disease surgery: Surgical outcomes of 268 cases. Turkish J Urol. 2018;44:10–15. doi: 10.5152/tud.2018.87405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Garaffa G., Sacca A., Christopher A.N., et al. Circumcision is not mandatory in penile surgery. BJU Int. 2010;105:222–224. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08763.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Savoca G., Scieri F., Pietropaolo F., et al. Straightening corporoplasty for Peyronie's disease: A review of 218 patients with median follow-up of 89 months. Eur Urol. 2004;46:610–614. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.04.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Nesbit R.M. Congenital curvatute of the phallus: Report of three casese with description of corrective operation. J Urol. 1965;93:230–232. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)63751-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Chung E., Wang R., Ralph D., et al. A worldwide survey on Peyronie's disease surgical practice patterns among surgeons. J Sex Med. 2018;15:568–575. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.01.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Segal R.L., Burnett A.L. Surgical management for Peyronie's disease. World J Mens Health. 2013;31:1. doi: 10.5534/wjmh.2013.31.1.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Pryor J.P. Correction of penile curvature and Peyronie's disease: Why I prefer the Nesbit technique. Int J Impot Res. 1998;10:129–131. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900331. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Ralph D.J., Al-Akraa M., Pryor J.P. Nesbit operation for Peyronie's disease: 16-year experience. J Urol. 1995;154:1362–1363. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)66862-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Yachia D. Modified corporoplasty for the treatment of penile curvature. J Urol. 1990;143:80–82. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)39871-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Lopes I., Tomada N., Vendeira P. Penile corporoplasty with Yachia's technique for Peyronie's disease: Single center experience with 117 patients. Urol Ann. 2013;5:167–171. doi: 10.4103/0974-7796.115736. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Essed E., Schroeder F.H. New surgical treatment for Peyronie disease. Urology. 1985;25:582–587. doi: 10.1016/0090-4295(85)90285-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Gholami S.S., Lue T.F. Correction of penile curvature using the 16-dot plication technique: A review of 132 patients. J Urol. 2002;167:2066–2069. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65085-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Greenfield J.M., Lucas S., Levine L.A. Factors affecting the loss of length associated with Tunica albuginea plication for correction of penile curvature. J Urol. 2006;175:238–241. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00063-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Geertsen U.A., Brok K.E., Andersen B., et al. Peyronie curvature treated by plication of the penile fasciae. Br J Urol. 1996;77:733–735. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1996.97621.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Van Der Horst C., Martínez Portillo F.J., Seif C., et al. Treatment of penile curvature with Essed-Schröder tunical plication: Aspects of quality of life from the patients’ perspective. BJU Int. 2004;93:105–108. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.04566.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Bokarica P., Parazajder J., Mazuran B., et al. Surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease based on penile length and degree of curvature. Int J Impot Res. 2005;17:170–174. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3901255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Leach G.E. Re: Modified nesbit procedure for the treatment of Peyronie's disease: A comparative outcome analysis [4](multiple letters) J Urol. 1998;159:1647. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199805000-00073. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Rolle L., Tamagnone A., Timpano M., et al. The Nesbit operation for penile curvature: An easy and effective technical modification. J Urol. 2005;173:171–174. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000147160.53124.1a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Savoca G., Trombetta C., Ciampalini S., et al. Long-term results with Nesbit's procedure as treatment of Peyronie's disease. Int J Impot Res. 2000;12:289–293. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900612. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Langston J.P., Carson C.C. Peyronie disease: Plication or grafting. Urol Clin North Am. 2011;38:207–216. doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2011.03.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Chahal R., Gogoi N.K., Sundaram S.K., et al. Corporal plication for penile curvature caused by Peyronie's disease: The patients’ perspective. BJU Int. 2001;87:352–356. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2001.00114.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Schultheiss D., Meschi M.R., Hagemann J., et al. Congenital and acquired penile deviation treated with the Essed plication method. Eur Urol. 2000;38:167–171. doi: 10.1159/000020275. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Brant W.O., Bella A.J., Garcia M.M., et al. Surgical atlas correction of Peyronie's disease: Plaque incision and grafting. BJU Int. 2006;97:1353–1360. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06237.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Egydio P.H., Lucon A.M., Arap S. A single relaxing incision to correct different types of penile curvature: Surgical technique based on geometrical principles. BJU Int. 2004;94:1147–1157. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.05220.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Kadioglu A., Küçükdurmaz F., Sanli O. Current status of the surgical management of Peyronie's disease. Nat Rev Urol. 2011;8:95–106. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2010.233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Rice P.G., Somani B.K., Rees R.W. Twenty years of plaque incision and grafting for Peyronie's disease: A review of literature. Sex Med. 2019;7:115–128. doi: 10.1016/j.esxm.2019.01.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Hsu G.L., Chen H.S., Hsieh C.H., et al. Long-term results of autologous venous grafts for penile morphological reconstruction. J Androl. 2007;28:186–193. doi: 10.2164/jandrol.106.000760. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Akkus E., Ozkara H., Alici B., et al. Incision and venous patch graft in the surgical treatment of penile curvature in Peyronie's disease. Eur Urol. 2001;40:531–537. doi: 10.1159/000049831. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Kadioglu A., Sanli O., Akman T., et al. Surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease: A single center experience with 145 patients. Eur Urol. 2008;53:432–440. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.04.045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Cormio L., Zucchi A., Lorusso F., et al. Surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease by plaque incision and grafting with buccal mucosa. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1469–1476. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.11.041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Cormio L., Mancini V., Massenio P., et al. Combined plaque incision, buccal mucosa grafting, and additional tunica albuginea plication for Peyronie's disease. Sex Med. 2019;7:48–53. doi: 10.1016/j.esxm.2018.11.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Kalsi J.S., Christopher N., Ralph D.J., et al. Plaque incision and fascia lata grafting in the surgical management of Peyronie's disease. BJU Int. 2006;98:110–115. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06251.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Levine L.A., Estrada C.R. Human cadaveric pericardial graft for the surgical correction of Peyronie's disease. J Urol. 2003;170:2359–2362. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000091102.10849.95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Chun J.L., McGregor A., Krishnan R., et al. A comparison of dermal and cadaveric pericardial grafts in the modified Horton-Devine procedure for Peyronie's disease. J Urol. 2001;166:185–188. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66106-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Hatzichristodoulou G. Introducing the ventral sealing technique using collagen fleece for surgical therapy of patients with ventral Peyronie's curvature: Initial experience. Int J Impot Res. 2018;30:306–311. doi: 10.1038/s41443-018-0044-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Rosenhammer B., Sayedahmed K., Fritsche H.M., et al. Long-term outcome after grafting with small intestinal submucosa and collagen fleece in patients with Peyronie's disease: a matched pair analysis. Int J Impot Res. 2019;31:256–262. doi: 10.1038/s41443-018-0071-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Sayedahmed K., Rosenhammer B., Spachmann P.J., et al. Bicentric prospective evaluation of corporoplasty with porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) in patients with severe Peyronie's disease. World J Urol. 2017;35:1119–1124. doi: 10.1007/s00345-016-1973-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Staerman F., Pierrevelcin J., Ripert T., et al. Medium-term follow-up of plaque incision and porcine small intestinal submucosal grafting for Peyronie's disease. Int J Impot Res. 2010;22:343–348. doi: 10.1038/ijir.2010.28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Valente P., Gomes C., Tomada N. Small intestinal submucosa grafting for Peyronie disease: Outcomes and patient satisfaction. Urology. 2017;100:117–124. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.09.055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Breyer B.N., Brant W.O., Garcia M.M., et al. Complications of porcine small intestine submucosa graft for Peyronie's disease. J Urol. 2007;177:589–591. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.09.051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Chung E., Clendinning E., Lessard L., et al. Five-year follow-up of Peyronie's graft surgery: Outcomes and patient satisfaction. J Sex Med. 2011;8:594–600. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.02102.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Cosentino M., Kanashiro A., Vives A., et al. Surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease with small intestinal submucosa graft patch. Int J Impot Res. 2016;28:106–109. doi: 10.1038/ijir.2016.10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Knoll L.D. Use of porcine small intestinal submucosal graft in the surgical management of Peyronie's disease. Urology. 2001;57:753–757. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(00)01079-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Knoll L.D. Use of small intestinal submucosa graft for the surgical management of Peyronie's disease. J Urol. 2007;178:2474–2478. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Kovac J.R., Brock G.B. Surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction after dermal, pericardial, and small intestinal submucosal grafting for peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2007;4:1500–1508. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00453.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Lee E.W., Shindel A.W., Brandes S.B. Small intestinal submucosa for patch grafting after plaque incision in the treatment of Peyronie's disease. Int Braz J Urol. 2008;34:191–196. doi: 10.1590/s1677-55382008000200009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Morgado A., Morgado M.R., 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;6:909–915. doi: 10.1111/andr.12522. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Otero J.R., Gómez B.G., Polo J.M., et al. Use of a lyophilized bovine pericardium graft to repair tunical defect in patients with Peyronie's disease: Experience in a clinical setting. Asian J Androl. 2017;19:316–320. doi: 10.4103/1008-682X.171572. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Khera M., Bella A., Karpman E., 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;15:786–788. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.02.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Chung E., Solomon M., Deyoung L., et al. Comparison between AMS 700TM CX and ColoplastTM titan inflatable penile prosthesis for Peyronie's disease treatment and remodeling: Clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. J Sex Med. 2013;10:2855–2860. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Chung P.H., Francis Scott J., Morey A.F. High patient satisfaction of inflatable penile prosthesis insertion with synchronous penile plication for erectile dysfunction and Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2014;11:1593–1598. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12530. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Garaffa G., Minervini A., Christopher N.A., et al. The management of residual curvature after penile prosthesis implantation in men with Peyronie's disease. BJU Int. 2011;108:1152–1156. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.10023.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Levine L.A., Benson J., Hoover C. Inflatable penile prosthesis placement in men with Peyronie's disease and drug-resistant erectile dysfunction: A single-center study. J Sex Med. 2010;7:3775–3783. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.01971.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Rolle L., Ceruti C., Timpano M., et al. A new, innovative, lengthening surgical procedure for Peyronie's disease by penile prosthesis implantation with double dorsal-ventral patch graft: The “Sliding Technique. J Sex Med. 2012;9:2389–2395. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02675.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Sansalone S., Garaffa G., Djinovic R., et al. Simultaneous penile lengthening and penile prosthesis implantation in patients with Peyronie's disease, refractory erectile dysfunction, and severe penile shortening. J Sex Med. 2012;9:316–321. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02509.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Rolle L., Falcone M., Ceruti C., et al. A prospective multicentric international study on the surgical outcomes and patients’ satisfaction rates of the “sliding” technique for end-stage Peyronie's disease with severe shortening of the penis and erectile dysfunction. BJU Int. 2016;117:814–820. doi: 10.1111/bju.13371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Egydio P.H., Kuehhas F.E. The Multiple-Slit Technique (MUST) for penile length and girth restoration. J Sex Med. 2018;15:261–269. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2017.11.223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Kim D.S., Pang M.G. The effect of male circumcision on sexuality. BJU Int. 2007;99:619–622. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06646.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Flores S., Choi J., Alex B., et al. Erectile dysfunction after plaque incision and grafting: Short-term assessment of incidence and predictors. J Sex Med. 2011;8:2031–2037. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02299.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Zucchi A., Silvani M., Pastore A.L., et al. Corporoplasty using buccal mucosa graft in peyronie disease: Is it a first choice? Urology. 2015;85:679–683. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.10.026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Chung E., Yan H., De Young L., et al. Penile Doppler sonographic and clinical characteristics in Peyronie's disease and/or erectile dysfunction: An analysis of 1500 men with male sexual dysfunction. BJU Int. 2012;110:1201–1205. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10851.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Montorsi F., Salonia A., Maga T., et al. Evidence based assessment of long-term results of plaque incision and vein grafting for Peyronie's disease. J Urol. 2000;163:1704–1708. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67525-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Sampaio J.S., Fonseca J., Passarinho A., et al. Peyronie's disease: Surgical correction of 40 patients with relaxing incision and duramater graft. Eur Urol. 2002;41:551–555. doi: 10.1016/S0302-2838(02)00071-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Sikka S.C., Hellstrom W.J.G., Brock G., et al. Standardization of vascular assessment of erectile dysfunction standard operating procedures for duplex ultrasound. J Sex Med. 2013;10:120–129. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02825.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Shakir N., Yi Y., Reddy R., et al. 277 Sustained improvement in erectile function after penile plication for Peyronie's disease: Long-term patient-reported outcomes. J Sex Med. 2019;16:S132–S133. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.01.282. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Hudak S.J., Morey A.F., Adibi M., et al. Favorable patient reported outcomes after penile plication for wide array of Peyronie disease abnormalities. J Urol. 2013;189:1019–1024. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112.Brake M., Keller H., Lamadé F., et al. Operative korrektur der penisdeviation. Methode nach Nesbit vs. Schroeder-Essed. Urol - Ausgabe A. 1999;38:264–269. doi: 10.1007/s001200050279. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113.Cordon B.H., Sundaram V., Hofer M.D., et al. Penile plication as salvage strategy for refractory Peyronie's disease deformities. Urol Pract. 2017;4:149–154. doi: 10.1016/j.urpr.2016.05.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114.Chow A.K., Sidelsky S.A., Levine L.A. 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;15:1021–1029. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.04.642. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115.Dugi D.D., Morey A.F. Penoscrotal plication as a uniform approach to reconstruction of penile curvature. BJU Int. 2010;105:1440–1444. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08991.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116.Daitch J.A., Angermeier K.W., Montague D.K. Modified corporoplasty for penile curvature: Long-term results and patient satisfaction. J Urol. 1999;162:2006–2009. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)68088-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117.Kargi E., Yeşilli Ç., Hoşnuter M., et al. Relaxation incision and fascia lata grafting in the surgical correction of penile curvature in Peyronie's disease. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113:254–259. doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000095951.04305.38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118.Leungwattanakij S., Bivalacqua T.J., Reddy S., et al. Long-term follow-up on use of pericardial graft in the surgical management of Peyronie's disease. Int J Impot Res. 2001;13:183–186. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900676. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119.Sampaio J.S., Fonseca J., Passarinho A., et al. Peyronie's disease: Surgical correction of 40 patients with relaxing incision and duramater graft. Eur Urol. 2002;41:551–555. doi: 10.1016/s0302-2838(02)00071-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120.Arena F., Peracchia G., Di Stefano C., et al. Peyronie's disease - Incision and dorsal vein grafting combined with contralateral plication in straightening the penis. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1999;33:181–185. doi: 10.1080/003655999750015961. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121.Adeniyi A.A., Goorney S.R., Pryor J.P., et al. The Lue procedure: An analysis of the outcome in Peyronie's disease. BJU Int. 2002;89:404–408. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.01896.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122.Metin A., Kayigil Ö., Ahmed S.İ. Plaque incision and venous patch grafting for Peyronie's disease. Int Urol Nephrol. 2002;34:223–227. doi: 10.1023/A:1023290705439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123.Hatzichristou D.G., Hatzimouratidis K., Apostolidis A., et al. Corporoplasty using tunica albuginea free grafts for penile curvature: Surgical technique and long-term results. J Urol. 2002;167:1367–1370. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65302-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124.Backhaus B.O., Müller S.C., Albers P. Corporoplasty for advanced peyronie's disease using venous and/or dermis patch grafting: New surgical technique and long-term patient satisfaction. J Urol. 2003;169:981–984. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000052403.11923.51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125.Wimpissinger F., Parnham A., Gutjahr G., et al. 10 Years’ plaque incision and vein grafting for Peyronie's disease: Does time matter? J Sex Med. 2016;13:120–128. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2015.12.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126.Nooter R.I., Bosch J.L.H.R., Schroder F.H. Peyronie's disease and congenital penile curvature: Long-term results of operative treatment with the plication procedure. Br J Urol. 1994;74:497–500. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.1994.tb00430.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127.Terrier J.E., Tal R., Nelson C.J., et al. Penile sensory changes after plaque incision and grafting surgery for Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1491–1497. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.07.020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128.Cantoro U., Polito M., Catanzariti F., et al. Penile plication for Peyronie's disease: Our results with mean follow-up of 103 months on 89 patients. Int J Impot Res. 2014;26:156–159. doi: 10.1038/ijir.2014.6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129.Adibi M., Hudak S.J., Morey A.F. Penile plication without degloving enables effective correction of complex Peyronie's deformities. Urology. 2012;79:831–835. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.12.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130.Çayan S., Aşcı R., Efesoy O., et al. Comparison of Patient's satisfaction and long-term results of 2 penile plication techniques: Lessons learned from 387 patients with penile curvature. Urology. 2019;129:106–112. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.02.039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131.Reddy R.S., McKibben M.J., Fuchs J.S., et al. Plication for severe Peyronie's deformities has similar long-term outcomes to milder cases. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1498–1505. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.08.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132.Van Der Drift D.G.F., Vroege J.A., Groenendijk P.M., et al. The plication procedure for penile curvature: Surgical outcome and postoperative sexual functioning. Urol Int. 2002;69:120–124. doi: 10.1159/000065560. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133.Chung P.H., Tausch T.J., Simhan J., et al. Dorsal plication without degloving is safe and effective for correcting ventral penile deformities. Urology. 2014;84:1228–1233. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.064. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134.Syed A.H., Abbasi Z., Hargreave T.B. Nesbit procedure for disabling Peyronie's curvature: A median follow-up of 84 months. Urology. 2003;61:999–1003. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(02)02549-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135.Kadioǧlu A., Tefekli A., Usta M., et al. Surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease with incision and venous patch technique. Int J Impot Res. 1999;11:75–81. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136.Yossepowitch O., Lifshitz D.A., Dekel Y., et al. Effect of incision and saphenous vein grafting for Peyronie's disease on penile length and sexual satisfaction. J Urol. 2001;166:1769–1773. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65672-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137.Khawaja A.R., Dar T.I., Zahur S., et al. Use of autologous grafts in the treatment of acquired penile curvature: An experience of 33 cases. Urol Ann. 2016;8:218–222. doi: 10.4103/0974-7796.176875. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138.Usta M.F., Bivalacqua T.J., Sanabria J., et al. Patient and partner satisfaction and long-term results after surgical treatment for Peyronie's disease. Urology. 2003;62:105–109. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00244-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139.Kovac J.R., Brock G.B. Surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction after dermal, pericardial, and small intestinal submucosal grafting for Peyronie's disease. J Sex Med. 2007;4:1500–1508. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00453.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140.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;2:132–138. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2005.20113.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141.Da Ros C.T., Graziottin T.M., Ribeiro E., et al. Long-term follow-up of penile curvature correction utilizing autologous albugineal crural graft. Int Braz J Urol. 2012;38:242–247. doi: 10.1590/S1677-55382012000200013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142.Kim D.H., Lesser T.F., Aboseif S.R. Subjective patient-reported experiences after surgery for Peyronie's disease: Corporeal plication versus plaque incision with vein graft. Urology. 2008;71:698–702. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.11.065. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143.Lee E.W., Shindel A.W., Brandes S.B. Small intestinal submucosa for patch grafting after plaque incision in the treatment of Peyronie's disease. Int Braz J Urol. 2008;34:191–196. doi: 10.1590/s1677-55382008000200009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144.Wilson S.K., Mora-Estaves C., Egydio P., et al. Glans necrosis following penile prosthesis implantation: Prevention and treatment suggestions. Urology. 2017;107:144–148. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.06.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145.Harris C.F., Mydlo J.H. Ischemia and gangrene of the penis. J Urol. 2003;169:1795. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000057796.64080.3a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146.Köhler T.S., Gupta N.K., Wilson S.K. Calvert McBride Publishers; Fort Smith, Arkansas: 2018. Wilson's pearls, perils and pitfalls of penile prosthesis surgery. [Google Scholar]
  • 147.Shaeer O.K.Z. Correction of penile curvature by rotation of the corpora cavernosa: A case report. J Sex Med. 2006;3:932–937. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2006.00203.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148.Shaeer O., Shaeer K. Shaeer's corporal rotation III: Shortening-free correction of congenital penile curvature - the noncorporotomy technique. Eur Urol. 2016;69:129–134. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149.Friedrich M.G., Evans D., Noldus J., et al. The correction of penile curvature with the Essed-Schroder technique: A long-term follow-up assessing functional aspects and quality of life. BJU Int. 2000;86:1034–1038. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2000.00975.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150.Papagiannopoulos D., Yura E., Levine L. Examining postoperative outcomes after employing a surgical algorithm for management of Peyronie's disease: A single-institution retrospective review. J Sex Med. 2015;12:1474–1480. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12910. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151.Rehman J., Benet A., Minsky L.S., et al. Results of surgical treatment for abnormal penile curvature: Peyronie's disease and congenital deviation by modified Nesbit plication (tunical shaving and plication) J Urol. 1997;157:1288–1291. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)64953-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152.Sassine A.M., Wespes E., Schulman C.C. Modified corporoplasty for penilecurvature: 10 years’ experience. Urology. 1994;44:419–421. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(94)80106-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153.Shaeer O. Shaeer's corporal rotation for length-preserving correction of penile curvature: Modifications and 3-year experience. J Sex Med. 2008;5:2716–2724. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00913.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154.Hatzichristodoulou G. Evolution of the surgical sealing patch TachoSil® in Peyronie's disease reconstructive surgery: Technique and contemporary literature review. World J Urol. 2020;38:315–321. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02792-w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155.Gelbard M., Goldstein I., Hellstrom W.J.G., et al. Clinical efficacy, safety and tolerability of collagenase clostridium histolyticum for the treatment of peyronie disease in 2 large double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled phase 3 studies. J Urol. 2013;190:199–207. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.01.087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156.Levine L.A., Larsen S.M. Surgical correction of persistent Peyronie's disease following collagenase clostridium histolyticum treatment. J Sex Med. 2015;12:259–264. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12721. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157.DeLay K., Diao L., Nguyen H.M.T., et al. Successful treatment of residual curvature in Peyronie disease in men previously treated with intralesional collagenase clostridium histolyticum. Urology. 2017;110:110–113. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.08.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 158.Bazzi M., Jamil M.L., Dabaja A.A. Outcomes of surgery in Peyronie's disease following intralesional collagenase clostridium histolyticum injections. Curr Urol Rep. 2019;20 doi: 10.1007/s11934-019-0910-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 159.Chung E., Brock G. Penile traction therapy and Peyronie's disease: A state of art review of the current literature. Ther Adv Urol. 2013;5:59–65. doi: 10.1177/1756287212454932. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 160.Mulhall J.P., Jahoda A., Aviv N., et al. The impact of sildenafil citrate on sexual satisfaction profiles in men with a penile prosthesis in situ. BJU Int. 2004;93:97–99. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.04564.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 161.Rybak J., Papagiannopoulos D., Levine L. A retrospective comparative study of traction therapy vs. no traction following tunica albuginea plication or partial excision and grafting for Peyronie's disease: Measured lengths and patient perceptions. J Sex Med. 2012;9:2396–2403. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02849.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 162.Hatzichristodoulou G. Partial plaque excision and grafting with collagen fleece in Peyronie disease. J Sex Med. 2016;13:277–281. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2015.12.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 163.Hatzichristodoulou G. Novel approaches and new grafting materials in Peyronie's disease reconstructive surgery. Int J Impot Res. 2019 doi: 10.1038/s41443-019-0179-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 164.Wilson S.K., Delk J.R. A new treatment for Peyronie's disease: Modeling the penis over an inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol. 1994;152:1121–1123. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)32519-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 165.Perito P., Wilson S. The Peyronie's plaque “ scratch” : an adjunct to modeling. J Sex Med. 2013;10:1194–1197. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 166.Wilson S.K., Delk J.R. A new treatment for Peyronie's disease: modeling the penis over an inflatable penile prosthesis. J Urol. 1994;152:1121–1123. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)32519-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 167.Carlos E.C., Sexton S.J., Lentz A.C. Urethral injury and the penile prosthesis. Sex Med Rev. 2019;7:360–368. doi: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.06.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 168.Falcone M., Preto M., Cocci A., et al. Strategies and current practices for penile lengthening in severe Peyronie's disease cases: A systematic review. Int J Impot Res. 2020;32:52–63. doi: 10.1038/s41443-019-0189-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 169.Segal R.L., Cabrini M.R., Bivalacqua T.J., et al. Penile straightening maneuvers employed during penile prosthesis surgery: Technical options and outcomes. Int J Impot Res. 2014;26:182–185. doi: 10.1038/ijir.2014.7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 170.Clavell-Hernández J., Wang R. Penile size restoration with nondegloving approach for Peyronie's disease: Initial experience. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1506–1513. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.07.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 171.Levine L.A., Dimitriou R.J. A surgical algorithm for penile prosthesis placement in men with erectile failure and Peyronie's disease. Int J Impot Res. 2000;12:147–151. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 172.Carson C.C., Levine L.A. Outcomes of surgical treatment of Peyronie's disease. BJU Int. 2014;113:704–713. doi: 10.1111/bju.12565. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 173.Djordjevic M.L., Kojovic V. Penile prosthesis implantation and tunica albuginea incision without grafting in the treatment of Peyronie's disease with erectile dysfunction. Asian J Androl. 2013;15:391–394. doi: 10.1038/aja.2012.149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 174.Fabiani A., Fioretti F., Filosa A., et al. Patch bulging after plaque incision and grafting procedure for Peyronie's disease. Surgical repair with a collagen fleece. Arch Ital Di Urol e Androl. 2015;87:173–174. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2015.2.173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Sexual Medicine are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES