Skip to main content

Preoperative Evaluation for Penile Prosthesis Implantation

Penile implants carry the highest satisfaction scores in sexual medicine, but those scores depend overwhelmingly on who gets the operation and how expectations are set before the first incision. The single most consequential mistake in prosthetic urology is not a surgical one — it is implanting the wrong patient. This page covers patient selection, medical optimization, risk stratification, the CURSED personality framework, informed-consent essentials unique to this procedure, and the infection-prevention bundle that begins in clinic, not in the OR.[1][2]

The Decision to Implant​

Penile implantation is considered after failure of, intolerance to, or patient rejection of the less invasive rungs of the ED reconstructive ladder: PDE5 inhibitors, intraurethral alprostadil, vacuum erection device, and intracavernosal injection therapy.[1][3] The AUA/ISSM/EAU guidelines converge on three specific pathways where early implantation is reasonable:

  • Severe Peyronie's disease with ED — mechanical straightening by the implant is part of the operation, and medical therapy for ED is usually futile
  • Corporal fibrosis from ischemic priapism >36 hours, prior infection, or prior prosthesis explantation — dilation becomes progressively more difficult with time, so early implantation preserves length
  • Patient preference for a definitive, on-demand solution — this is a valid indication when the patient has been adequately counseled, even if they have not formally "failed" medical therapy

See penile-implants index for the indication list.

Patient Selection — the CURSED Framework​

Coined by Trost and Hellstrom and now widely adopted in prosthetic urology, the CURSED mnemonic identifies personality and circumstantial traits associated with post-implant dissatisfaction, medicolegal exposure, and repeated revision demands.[4]

LetterTraitWhat it looks like in clinic
CCompulsive / controlling personalityDetailed spreadsheets of every device specification; demands specific cylinder lengths; fixation on millimeter-level outcomes
UUnrealistic expectationsExpects return of natural erections, increased length, enhanced sensation, or improved orgasm — none of which the device provides
RRevision / previously operated elsewhereExplanted or revised at another institution; seeking a different outcome from a different surgeon
SSurgeon shoppingMultiple prior consultations; asks "what would Dr. X do?"; frames the visit as comparison shopping
EEntitled / demandingInterrupts, dismisses nurses and support staff, makes demands about the perioperative experience
DDepression / psychiatric disorderUntreated major depression, body dysmorphic disorder, or active psychiatric decompensation

None of these is an absolute contraindication, but each warrants additional counseling time, documentation, and — when multiple traits cluster — consideration of whether this patient will be better served by a different surgeon or a deferred decision. The literature consistently identifies unrealistic expectations and revision status as the two strongest predictors of dissatisfaction in patients with otherwise technically excellent outcomes.[4][5]

The partner conversation​

Partner involvement in the decision is one of the most under-documented satisfaction predictors. Partner satisfaction parallels patient satisfaction in prospective series (85–90%), and partner surprise at the permanence or mechanics of the device is a common post-op complaint.[6] Where possible, the partner should attend at least one preoperative visit, handle the demo device, and participate in the consent discussion.

Medical Optimization​

Diabetes​

Diabetes is the most extensively studied modifiable risk factor for prosthesis infection, associated with roughly 1.7-fold increased infection risk in multivariable analysis.[7] The HbA1c threshold remains debated — there is no prospective RCT establishing a validated cutoff. Common practice:

  • HbA1c <8.5% is the most widely cited threshold; above this, reassess with endocrinology collaboration
  • HbA1c <7% is ideal where achievable without inducing hypoglycemia
  • Point-of-care glucose <200 mg/dL on the morning of surgery
  • Hold SGLT2 inhibitors at least 3 days preoperatively to avoid euglycemic DKA

Notably, fructosamine (2–3 week glycemic average) is emerging as an adjunct in patients with hemoglobinopathies or where a more recent glycemic snapshot is clinically useful.

Obesity and metabolic syndrome​

Obesity amplifies operative difficulty (deeper scrotum, harder reservoir access) and fungal infection risk — 83% of fungal IPP infections occur in diabetic or obese patients.[8] BMI >30 warrants additional counseling on technical difficulty and infection risk; BMI >40 in a revision candidate is a reason to consider staged weight reduction before reimplantation.

MRSA screening and decolonization​

Nasal MRSA carriage is present in roughly 2–5% of the general population and higher in healthcare workers, dialysis patients, and those with recent hospitalization. Screening with nasal swab at the preoperative visit and decolonization of carriers with mupirocin 2% ointment twice daily × 5 days plus chlorhexidine body wash daily × 5 days is standard in most modern prosthetic protocols.[9]

Smoking​

Smoking cessation for at least 4 weeks preoperatively is the standard recommendation. The literature supporting this is adapted from general surgical wound-healing data rather than IPP-specific RCTs, but the logic is sound — tissue perfusion, wound healing, and infection all deteriorate in active smokers.

Hypogonadism​

Serum testosterone <300 ng/dL with symptoms is an indication to correct hypogonadism before or concurrent with implantation. Testosterone replacement does not need to be discontinued before surgery, and there is no evidence that it increases infection or thrombotic risk at physiologic doses.

Anticoagulation​

Warfarin, DOACs, and dual antiplatelet therapy require individualized perioperative plans coordinated with the prescribing clinician. Aspirin monotherapy (81 mg) can usually be continued. The scrotal hematoma risk from uncorrected anticoagulation is real and has been associated with infection in several series.

Physical Examination​

The prosthetic urology preop exam has elements not found in general urology:

  • Penile length in stretched and flaccid states — documented in clinic and shared with the patient so "shortening" concerns are reference-anchored
  • Corporal integrity — palpate for Peyronie's plaques, prior surgery scars (especially Nesbit / plication), and any areas of fibrosis from prior priapism or infection
  • Scrotal anatomy and dartos thickness — the pump sits between the dartos layers; excessively thick or tethered scrota change operative planning
  • Abdominal wall — prior low-transverse scars (Pfannenstiel, open prostatectomy, cystectomy, appendectomy, hernia mesh) make virgin space of Retzius reservoir placement riskier and push toward ectopic placement
  • Inguinal canal patency — patent processus vaginalis or known inguinal hernia changes reservoir strategy; a reservoir should not be placed through a hernia defect
  • Penile sensation — documented because post-op sensory changes are a common complaint and the baseline matters
  • Meatus and urethra — meatal stenosis or unrecognized stricture can affect postoperative catheterization decisions

Special Preoperative Considerations​

Prior pelvic / lower abdominal surgery​

A patient with prior radical prostatectomy, cystectomy, pelvic radiation, renal transplant, or extensive hernia mesh is not a candidate for reflexive space-of-Retzius reservoir placement. Preoperative planning includes:

  • Review of operative notes where available
  • Consideration of ectopic submuscular reservoir (behind the rectus abdominis, inferior to the arcuate line, above the posterior rectus sheath / transversalis fascia)
  • Consideration of a two-piece device (AMS Ambicor, Rigicon Infla10 2-piece) that avoids a separate abdominal reservoir
  • Discussion of malleable prosthesis for the highest-risk abdomens

See reservoir placement for technical options.

Peyronie's disease with ED​

Patients with Peyronie's require preoperative documentation of curvature direction, degree, and deformity complexity (hourglass, hinge, notch, indentation). Decision-making includes whether intraoperative modeling alone will suffice, whether plication is planned at time of implant, and whether a tunica albuginea incision / grafting step is anticipated.[10]

Prior prosthesis explantation​

A patient whose prior device was explanted for infection is the single-highest-risk patient the prosthetic urologist encounters. Prior IPP infection carries an odds ratio of approximately 4.7 for repeat infection on subsequent reimplantation.[7] These patients require:

  • Minimum 3-month (and ideally 6-month) interval from explantation
  • Documentation of infection clearance (white count, ESR/CRP, and clinical exam)
  • Preoperative imaging in selected cases (pelvic MRI to assess retained reservoir fragments, residual abscess)
  • Counseling on ~10% reinfection rate despite best practice
  • Consideration of malleable rather than inflatable reimplantation in the highest-risk scenarios

Post-radiation​

Pelvic radiation (for prostate or bladder cancer) increases infection risk, impairs wound healing, and can obscure fascial planes. Patients are counseled on higher complication rates (~2–3× baseline) and may benefit from delayed reimplantation (>12 months post-radiation) where possible.

Phalloplasty / neophallus​

Placement in a neophallus is fundamentally different — there are no native corpora, implant erosion rates are substantially higher, and dedicated neocorporal techniques (GraftJacket-wrapped, dedicated prosthesis designs, or malleable) are used. This is covered in the GAS section and is generally outside the scope of a primary prosthetic urology fellowship workflow.

Laboratory and Imaging​

Routine labs: CBC, BMP, HbA1c, coagulation profile where anticoagulated, UA and culture (preoperative urine must be sterile — treat UTI before proceeding). Selective screens for HIV, hepatitis where clinically appropriate.

Imaging is not routinely indicated for primary IPP. Selective use:

  • Penile duplex ultrasound — where the ED etiology is unclear or venous leak is suspected
  • Pelvic MRI — for complex Peyronie's with atypical curvature, for revision cases with suspected reservoir migration or abscess, and occasionally for neophallus planning
  • CT abdomen/pelvis — revision cases with suspected retained reservoir / tubing, or where abdominal anatomy is substantially altered

Informed Consent — What Is Unique​

Beyond the generic surgical consent elements, IPP implantation requires specific disclosures patients consistently report they wish they had better understood:

  • Natural erections will no longer be possible — the corporal dilation destroys the sinusoidal architecture. This is irreversible.
  • Length is what it is. The implant will not make the penis longer than its maximum stretched state. Many patients report subjective shortening post-op (1–2 cm) even with length-expanding cylinders.
  • Orgasm, ejaculation, and sensation are preserved — but not enhanced. If these were impaired preop, they will be impaired postop.
  • The device is mechanical and will eventually fail. Approximately 50% of patients need some form of revision by 10–15 years.[11]
  • Infection risk of ~1–3% primary, higher in revision and post-radiation cases. Infection typically mandates explantation.
  • The penis will feel different — the glans sits at the end of two rigid cylinders and will not engorge.
  • Partner involvement is predictive of satisfaction; this is worth re-emphasizing in consent.
  • Activation timing — usually 4–6 weeks postop; patients anticipating a specific upcoming event (wedding, vacation) should plan accordingly.

Many high-volume implanters have patients watch a manufacturer-provided device video and handle a demo device during the consent visit — a practice that reduces both postoperative dissatisfaction and medicolegal exposure.

Preoperative Infection-Prevention Bundle​

The infection-prevention protocol begins weeks before the case. See the full infection article for evidence base. The preop elements are:

  • Glycemic optimization (HbA1c <8.5% target)
  • MRSA nasal screen + decolonization of carriers
  • Smoking cessation ≥4 weeks
  • Chlorhexidine body wash the night before and morning of surgery (patient-performed)
  • No shaving at home — hair is clipped in the OR, never razor-shaved
  • Preoperative antibiotics per the modern regimen (vancomycin + gram-negative agent + fluconazole, single dose within 60 minutes of incision)

Documentation Essentials​

A prosthetic urology clinic note before the OR booking should contain:

  • Failed or contraindicated medical therapy trials (with dose, duration, response)
  • Baseline SHIM / IIEF score
  • Stretched and flaccid penile length
  • Partner discussion summary
  • Specific device selected and rationale (3-piece vs 2-piece vs malleable; brand)
  • Risk factors acknowledged (diabetes, radiation, prior surgery, revision status)
  • CURSED screen documented
  • All major complications discussed by name
  • Patient's stated expectations (verbatim quotes are protective)

See Also​

References​

1. Levine LA, Becher EF, Bella AJ, et al. Penile prosthesis surgery: current recommendations from the International Consultation on Sexual Medicine. J Sex Med. 2016;13(4):489–518. doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.01.017

2. Köhler T, Munarriz R, Parker J, et al. Penile prosthesis for erectile dysfunction: recommendations from the 5th International Consultation on Sexual Medicine. Sex Med Rev. 2025;13(2):144–171. doi:10.1093/sxmrev/qeaf001

3. Burnett AL, Nehra A, Breau RH, et al. Erectile Dysfunction: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2018;200(3):633–641. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2018.05.004

4. Trost LW, Baum N, Hellstrom WJ. Managing the difficult penile prosthesis patient. J Sex Med. 2013;10(4):893–907. doi:10.1111/jsm.12115

5. Carvalheira A, Santana R, Pereira NM. Why are men satisfied or dissatisfied with penile implants? A mixed-method study on satisfaction with penile prosthesis implantation. J Sex Med. 2015;12(12):2474–80. doi:10.1111/jsm.13054

6. Bernal RM, Henry GD. Contemporary patient satisfaction rates for three-piece inflatable penile prostheses. Adv Urol. 2012;2012:707321. doi:10.1155/2012/707321

7. Abou Chawareb E, Hammad MAM, Azad B, et al. Perioperative antimicrobial strategies in inflatable penile prosthesis surgery. J Urol. 2025;214(6):642–653. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000004716

8. Natsos A, Tatanis V, Lekkou A, et al. Unveiling the hidden perils: a comprehensive review of fungal infections in inflatable penile prosthesis surgery. J Pers Med. 2024;14(6):644. doi:10.3390/jpm14060644

9. Lightner DJ, Wymer K, Sanchez J, Kavoussi L. Best Practice Statement on Urologic Procedures and Antimicrobial Prophylaxis. J Urol. 2020;203(2):351–356. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000000509

10. Nehra A, Alterowitz R, Culkin DJ, et al. Peyronie's Disease: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2015;194(3):745–53. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2015.05.098

11. Enemchukwu EA, Kaufman MR, Whittam BM, Milam DF. Comparative revision rates of inflatable penile prostheses using woven Dacron fabric cylinders. J Urol. 2013;190(6):2189–93. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.07.015