Currently submitted to: JMIR Preprints
Date Submitted: Jan 16, 2024
Open Peer Review Period: Jan 16, 2024 - Dec 31, 2024
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Revisit Perito Implant® Technique
ABSTRACT
Infrapubic penile implant surgery is a viable option for patients with severe penile curvature, shortening, and impaired penile rigidity due to fibrosis of the corpora cavernosa (Sadeghi-Nejad, 2007). Studies have shown that patients who undergo penile implant surgery, particularly the infrapubic approach, experience significantly better erectile function and treatment satisfaction compared to those receiving other treatments such as sildenafil citrate and intracavernous prostaglandin E1 (Rajpurkar & Dhabuwala, 2003). The infrapubic approach offers advantages such as ease of reservoir placement, rapid implantation, and direct vision during the procedure, as well as avoiding an extra incision on the scrotum, which can hinder rehabilitation (Montague & Angermeier, 2000; Vollstedt et al., 2017). Additionally, it has been noted that the infrapubic approach can be quickly learned by urologists who are already comfortable with the trans‐scrotal approach (Kramer & Chason, 2010). However, it is important to consider the drawbacks associated with the infrapubic approach, such as the higher risk of surgical errors during the placement of the device in the corpora (Kramer et al., 2010).
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.