Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Optimization of Design and Surgical Positioning of Inflatable Penile Prostheses

  • Published:
Annals of Biomedical Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The interaction between the cylinders of an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) and the surrounding tissues during IPP-aided erection may result in local elevated stresses. These stresses may reach values that can obstruct penile blood vessels and cause ischemia and/or stimulate nerves around the operation site, thereby inducing sensations of pain. A new numerical model was used to analyze penile stresses postimplantation of different IPP types, in order to optimize prosthesis design and surgical positioning by enabling minimal stress transfer to dorsal blood vessels and nerves. The results suggest that intraluminal pressures should be maintained at low levels (about 80 kPa) while cylinder thickness and stiffness should be kept just high enough (approximately 15% of the radius and 1000 MPa, respectively) to eliminate deleterious cylinder-tissue contact stresses. Smaller prosthetic cylinders, i.e., occupying about 45% of the cavernosal space, may be advantageous in terms of reducing dorsal stresses, but lower penile rigidity should be expected. A significant decrease of dorsal stresses can also be achieved by encouraging the surgeon to position the cylinders toward the lower part of the corpora. The numerical simulations indicate that circular cylinders may allow greater biomechanical compatibility of the IPP with the penis structure than elliptic ones, and this should be a subject for clinical investigations. © 2000 Biomedical Engineering Society.

PAC00: 8780-y, 8719Rr, 0270Dh

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Bitsch, M., B. Kromann-Andersen, J. Schou, and E. Sjontoft. The elasticity and tensile strength of the tunica albuginea. J.Urol.(Baltimore)143:642–645, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Campbell, J. N., S. N. Raja, R. A. Meyer, and S. E. MacKinnon. Myelinated afferents signal the hyperalgesia associated with nerve injury. Pain32:89–94, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gefen, A., J. Chen, and D. Elad. Stresses in the normal and diabetic human penis following implantation of an inflatable prosthesis. Med.Biol.Eng.Comput.37:625–631, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Govier, F. E., R. P. Gibbons, R. J. Correa, T. R. Pritchett, and L. D. Kramer. Mechanical reliability, surgical complications, and patient and partner satisfaction of the modern three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology52:282–286, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hsu, G. L., G. Brock, L. Martinez-Pineiro, B. von Heyden, T. Lue, and E. A. Tanagho. Anatomy and strength of the tunica albuginea: Its relevance to penile prosthesis extrusion. J.Urol.(Baltimore)151:1205–1208, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McLaren, R. H., and D. M. Barrett. Patient and partner sat-isfaction with the AMS 700 penile prosthesis. J.Urol.(Bal-timore)147:62–65, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Merrill, D. C. Mentor inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology22:504–505, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Moncada, I., J. J. Hernandez, L. Hernandez, J. Lafuente, E. Lledo, E. Rodriguez, and I. Saenz De Tejada. Buckling of cylinders may cause prolonged penile pain after prosthesis implantation: A case control study using magnetic resonance imaging of the penis. J.Urol.(Baltimore)160:67–71, 1998.

  9. Nickas, M. E., R. Kessler, and J. N. Kabalin. Long-term experience with controlled expansion cylinders in the AMS 700CX inflatable penile prosthesis and comparison with earlier versions of the Scott inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology44:400–403, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Niv, D., and M. Devor. Does the blockade of surgical pain preempt postoperative pain and prevent its transition to chronicity? JASP Newsletter6:2–7, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Park, J. B. Biomaterials Science and Engineering.(New York, Plenum, 1984)

  12. Pescatory, E. S., and I. Goldstein. Intraluminal device pressures in 3-piece inflatable penile prostheses: The “patho-physiology” of mechanical malfunction. J.Urol.(Baltimore)149:295–300, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Quesada, E. T., and J. K. Light. The AMS 700 inflatable prosthesis: Long-term experience with the controlled expansion cylinders. J.Urol.(Baltimore)149:46–48, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Scott, F. B., W. E. Bradley, and G. W. Timm. Management of erectile impotence. Use of implantable inflatable prosthesis. Urology2:80–82, 1973.

  15. Steinkohl, W. B., and G. E. Leach. Mechanical complications associated with Mentor inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology38:32–34, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Torebjork, H. E., L. E. R. Lundberg, and R. H. LaMotte. Central changes in processing of mechanoreceptive input in capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia in humans. J.Physiol. 448: 765–780, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Venegas, J. G., M. P. Sullivan, S. B. Yalla, and M. A. Vickers. Assessment and modeling of the physical compo-nents of human corporovenous function. Am.J.Physiol.269:2109–2123, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Whalen, R. K., and D. C. Merrill. Patient satisfaction with Mentor inflatable penile prosthesis. Urology37:531–539, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gefen, A., Chen, J. & Elad, D. Optimization of Design and Surgical Positioning of Inflatable Penile Prostheses. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 28, 619–628 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1114/1.1306345

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1114/1.1306345

Navigation