(021) Eight-Dot Extended Corporotomy versus Conventional Corporotomy for Malleable Penile Prosthesis Implantation

Abstract Introduction To date, malleable type penile prosthesis implantation (MPPI) remains the more popular in developing countries, owing to its relative economic cost. Despite the simplicity of the procedure, there still may be areas of improvement and refinement to optimize procedure efficiency and accuracy subsequently improving postoperative outcomes while reducing complication risk. Objective We aimed to compare the eight-dot extended corporotomy and the conventional corporotomy techniques for MPPI with regard to operative time and postoperative complications. Methods We conducted a prospective randomized interventional clinical study on 51 subjects. Patients were randomized into 2 groups: the eight-dot group (n=27) and the conventional group (n=24). The eight-dot group underwent MPPI using the eight-dot extended corporotomy as previously described (VJPU - Eight-dot Extended Corporotomy: A More Secure, Aesthetic and Time Efficient Technique for Semirigid Penile Prosthesis Implantation, n.d.). The conventional group underwent MPPI using conventional limited corporotomies that were closed via continuous running sutures. We compared both groups in terms of corporotomy opening to closure time, overall procedure time, and perioperative complications. The follow-up period was 3 months. Results Upon timing in seconds (s), a significant time difference between the 2 groups was demonstrated for suture placement, corporotomy incision and implant placement, corporotomy closure, and total procedure duration. Although patients in the eight-dot group required a longer time for suture placement vs the conventional group (486 vs 201 s, respectively, p < 0.001), the durations for the remaining implantation steps, as well as the whole procedure, were significantly shorter for the former group. Corporotomy opening followed by implant placement took significantly less time for the eight-dot group (1090 s) vs the conventional group (1313 s), p <0.001. Moreover, insertion of implant rods was subjectively easier with no need for aggressive bending owing to the extended corporotomy length. Similarly, corporotomy closure using the 8-dot technique was 10.13 minutes swifter than the conventional group (220 s vs. 828 s, respectively, p < 0.001). The total procedure length was over 8 minutes shorter for the eight-dot group as opposed to the conventional group (2527 vs 3027 s, respectively, p < 0.001). In terms of postoperative complications in the form of pain, swelling, hematoma, and infection, there were no significant differences between both groups. Conclusions The eight-dot extended corporotomy technique is a safe and time-saving approach compared to the conventional limited corporotomy technique, making the MPPI procedure more efficient. A swifter procedure decreases both patient exposure to anesthesia and device exposure to air which in turn lowers the risk for potential postoperative complications. Disclosure No.