Outcomes of Alternative Reservoir Placement in the Lateral Retroperitoneum During Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Placement

• DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.02.021
• Publication Date: 2021-02-26T12:07:17Z
• Authors: Jeffrey C. Loh-Doyle; Jeffery S. Lin; Leo R. Doumanian; Mukul B. Patil; Stuart D. Boyd
• Keywords: Male; Middle Aged; Penile Implantation; Prosthesis Design; 3. Good health; 03 medical and health sciences; Treatment Outcome; 0302 clinical medicine; Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Retroperitoneal Space; Penile Prosthesis; Aged; Retrospective Studies

To describe outcomes of reservoir placement, exchange, and extraction from the lateral retroperitoneum (LR) in complex patients with a three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP).A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients that underwent placement of an IPP from 2009 to 2019. Patients with placement of the reservoir in the LR were identified. Intraoperative complications during reservoir placement, exchange, or removal, reservoir-related outcomes, and secondary device-related outcomes were collated and compared to patients who underwent traditional Space of Retzius reservoir placement.A total of 587 men underwent primary IPP placement with 321 patients undergoing reservoir placement in the SOR and 266 in the LR. No significant differences were found in intra-operative reservoir-related outcomes (P=.272) between the 2 groups during placement, replacement, or extraction. Bowel injury occurred in 1 patient in the LR group during placement. No significant differences were found in postoperative reservoir complications (P= .534). Both groups each had one instance of patient reported bulge and pain at reservoir site (P= .6777). Two (0.6%) patients in the SOR group and 3 (1.1%) patients in the LR group had a reservoir failure or leak. There was a trend towards a lower rate of device infections in the LR group (1.9%) compared to the SOR group (4.7%) (P= .063). There were no significant differences in overall device mechanical failure rates between both groups (P= .919).Reservoir placement in the LR is safe in patients with complex pelvic anatomy with equivalent device durability and no difference in surgical outcomes compared to standard retropubic reservoir placement.