Öz
Özet
Amaç: Penil eğriliğin en sık nedeni olan peyroni hastalığı için hala en
etkili tedavi yöntemini cerrrahi müdahaleler oluşturmaktadır. Fonksiyonel ve
kozmetik sonuçları olan peyroni cerrahisinde hasta memnuniyetine etki eden
faktörleri araştırmayı amaçladık.
Gereç ve yöntem: 2012-2019 yılları arasında peyroni hstalığı tanısı konulmuş
ve peyroni cerrahisi önerilmiş hastaların kayıtları retrospektif olarak
incelendi. 1. Yıl kontrollerinde hastaların erektil kapasite, rezidüel /
tekrarlayan penil deformite, penil uzunluk ve potansiyel komplikasyonlar
açısından preoperatif kayıtları ile birlikte değerlendirildi ve memnuniyet
düzeyleri ölçülerek etki eden faktörler araştırıldı. Bulgular: Plikasyon
cerrahisi (Grup 1) geçiren 27 hasta, İnsizyon safen ven greft cerrahisi (Grup
2) geçiren 21 hasta saptandı. Grup 1'de hasta memnuniyet %83,33, grup 2'de %67,14
saptandı. Grup 2’de penil kısalma miktarı (2,71±1,41 cm) grup 1’e (1,14±0,91
cm) göre daha fazla gözlendi. Hastaların memnuniyetine etki eden parametreler
incelendiğinde; penis boyu kısalmasıyla (p=0,036), cerrahi öncesi
erektil disfonksiyon varlığını belirtmekle (rho-,375, p=0,009), plak
varlığıyla (p=0,002), eşlik eden komorbid hastalık varlığıyla (p<0,001),
şikayet tekrarı varlığıyla (p=0,006) hasta memnuniyeti arasında negatif
korelasyon saptandı.
Sonuç: Peyroni hastalığında cerrahi yöntemler en etkili tedavi yöntemleri
olarak önerilmektedir. Hastaların postoperatif penil kısalma ve kurvatür
rekürrensi açısından preoperatif iyi bir bilgilendirme yapılması hasta
memnuniyetlerini arttırabilir.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Peyroni hastalığı peyroni cerrahisi penil kısalma IIEF-5 IIEF-5
Destekleyen Kurum
yok
Proje Numarası
yok
Teşekkür
yok
Kaynakça
- 1- Sommer F, Schwarzer U, Wassmer G, Bloch W, Braun M, Klotz T. Epidemiology of Peyronie-s disease. Int J Impot Res 2002;14, 379–383. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900863 2- Trost LW, Gur S, Hellstrom WJ. Pharmacological management of Peyronie’s disease. Drugs 2007;67(4):527–545. DOI: 10.2165/00003495-200767040-00004 3- Chung E, Ralph D, Kagioglu A, Garaffa G, Shamsodini A, Bivalacqua T, et al. Evidence-Based Management Guidelines on Peyronie's Disease. J Sex Med 2016;13:905-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.04.062 4- Kadıoğlu A, Salabaş E, Özmez A, Ural AF, Yücel ÖB, Ortaç M, et al. Peyronie`s disease surgery: Surgical outcomes of 268 cases. Turk J Urol 2018;44(1):10-5. DOI: 10.5152/tud.2018.87405 5- Dibenedetti DB, Nguyen D, Zografos L, Ziemiecki R, Zhou X. A Population-Based Study of Peyronie's Disease: Prevalence and Treatment Patterns in the United States. Adv Urol 2011;2011:282503. DOI: 10.1155/2011/282503 6- Smith JF, Waalsh TJ, Lue TF. Peyronie’s disease: a critical appraisal of current diagnosis and treatment. Int J Impot Res 2008;20:445-459. DOI: 10.1038/ijir.2008.30 7- Talib RA, Ibrahim MA, Canguven O. Nonsurgical treatment options in Peyronie's Disease: 2016 update. Turk J Urol. 2016;42(4):217-223. DOI: 10.5152/tud.2016.40799 8- Mobley EM, Fuchs ME, Myers JB, Brant WO. Update on plication prodedures for Peyronie’s disease and other penile deformities. Ther Adv Urol 2012;4:335-346. DOI: 10.1177/1756287212448224 9- Falcone M, Preto M, Cocci A, Garaffa G. Strategies and current practices for penile lengthening in severe Peyronie’s disease cases: a systematic review. Int J Impot Res. 2020;32(1):52-63. DOI: 10.1038/s41443-019-0189-9. 10- Pryor JP, Fitzpatrick JM. A new approach to the correction of penile deformity in Peyronie’s disease. J Urol 1979;122:622–3. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)56530-1 11- Licht MR, Lewis RW. Modified Nesbit procedure for the treatment of Peyronie’s disease: a comparative outcome analysis. J Urol 1997;158(2):460–3. 12- Syeed AH, Abbasi Z, Hargreave TB. Nesbit procedure for disabling Peyronie’s curvature: a median follow-up of 84 months. Urology 2003;61(5):999–1003. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(02)02549-9 13- van der Horst C, Martinez Portillo FJ, Seif C, Melchior D, Stübinger H, Alken P, et al. Quality of life after surgical correction of penile deviation with the Schroeder-Essed plication. Aktuelle Urol. 2003;34(2):109-14. DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-38907 14- Levine LA, Lenting EL: A surgical algorithm fort he treatment of Peyronie’s disease. J. Urol 1997;158:2149-52. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)68184-9 15- Gholami SS, Lue TF. Correction of penile curvature using the 16-dot plication technique: a review of 132 patients. J Urol 2002;167(5):2066–9. 16- Schultheiss D, Meschi MR, Hagemann J, Truss MC, Stief CG, Jonas U. Congenital and acquired penile deviation treated with the essed plication method. Eur Urol. 2000;38(2):167-71. DOI: 10.1159/000020275 17- Barrett-harlow B, Clavell-hernandez J, Wang R. New developments in surgical treatment for penile size preservation in Peyronie’ s disease. Sex Med Rev. 2019;7(1):156–66. DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.07.001 18- Tahra A, Küçük EV, İnkaya A. Peyroni hastalığının hafif ve orta şiddetli kurvatür tedavisinde plikasyon ve greftleme cerrahisi ile sonuçlarımız. Androl Bul 2017; 19(1): 6-9. DOI: 10.24898/tandro.2017.46547 19- Kadirov R, Coskun B, Kaygisiz O, Gunseren KO, Kordan Y, Yavascaoglu I, et al. Penile Plication With or Without Degloving of the Penis Results in Similar Outcomes. Sex Med. 2017;5(3):e142-e147. DOI: 10.1016/j.esxm.2017.05.001 20- Taylor FL, Levine LA. Surgical correction of Peyronie’s disease via tunica albuginea plication or partial plaque excision with pericar- dial graft: long-term follow up. J Sex Med 2008;5:2221–8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00941.x 21- El-Sakka AI, Rashwan HM, Lue TF. Venous patch graft for Peyronie’s disease. Part II. outcome analysis. J Urol. 1998;160(6 Pt 1):2050-3. DOI: 10.1097/00005392-199812010-00030 22- Montorsi F, Salonia A, Maga T, Bua L, Guazzoni G, Barbieri L, et al. Evidence-based assessment of long-term results in plaque incision and vein grafting for Peyronie’s disease. J Urol 2000;163(6):1704–8. 23- Backhaus B, Muller S, Albers P. Corporoplasty for advanced Peyronie’s disease using venous and/or dermis patch grafting: new surgical technique and long-term patient satisfaction. J Urol 2003;169(3):981–4. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000052403.11923.51 24- Yurkanin JP, Dean R, Wessells H. Effect of incision and saphenous vein grafting for Peyronie’s disease on penile length and sexual satisfaction. J Urol. 2001;166(5):1769-72; discussion 1772-3. 25- Adeniyi AA, Goorney SR, Pryor JP, Ralph DJ. The Lue procedure: an analysis of the outcome in Peyronie’s disease. BJU Int 2002;89:404–8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.01896.x 26- Kalsi J, Minhas S, Christopher N, Ralph D: The results of plaque incision and venous grafting (Lue procedure) to correct the penile deformity of Peyronie's disease. BJU Int 2005;95: 1029-33. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05459.x 27- Akman T, Sanli O, Gurkan L, Cakan M, Tezer M, Kadioglu A: Medial dissection of the neurovascular bundle in Peyronie’s patients with dorsal curvature: Demonstration of a technique and analysis of outcome. Book of Abstracts 8th Congress of the European Society for Sexual Medicine 2006; 1, A: V-01-001. 28- Kadioglu A, Sanli O, Akman T, Cakan M, Erol B, Mamadov F. Surgical treatment of Peyronie’s disease: a single center experience with 145 patients. Eur Urol 2008;53(2):432–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.04.045 29- Hsu GL, Chen HS, Hsieh CH, Chen RM, Wen HS, Liu LJ, et al. Long-term results of autologous venous grafts for penile morphological reconstruction. J Androl 2007:28(1);186–93. DOI: 10.2164/jandrol.106.000760 30- Egydio PH, Lucon AM, Arap S. Treatment of Peyronie’s disease by incomplete circumferential incision of the tunica albuginea and plaque with bovine pericardium graft. Urology. 2002;59(4):570-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01651-x 31- Chun JL, McGregor A, Krishnan R, Carson CC.. A comparison of dermal and cadaveric pericardial grafts in the modified Horton-Devine procedure for Peyronie’s disease. J Urol 2001;166(1):185–8. 32- Hatzichristodoulou G. Grafting techniques for Peyronie’ s disease. Transl Androl Urol. 2016;5:334–41. DOI: 10.21037/tau.2016.03.16 33- Hatzichristodoulou G, Osmonov D, Kübler H, Hellstrom WJG, Yafi FA. Contemporary review of grafting techniques for the surgical treatment of Peyronie’s disease. Sex Med Rev. 2017;5:544–52. DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.01.006
Öz
Abstract
Purpose: Surgical interventions are still the most effective treatment management
for peyroni disease, which is the most common cause of penile curvature. We
aimed to investigate the factors affecting patient satisfaction in peyroni surgery
with functional and cosmetic results.
Material method: The records of patients who had been diagnosed with peyroni
disease between 2012-2019 and who had been recommended peyroni surgery were
retrospectively analyzed. In the 1st year controls, the patients were evaluated
together with their preoperative records in terms of erectile capacity,
residual / recurrent penile deformity, penile length, and potential
complications, and the factors affecting the effects were investigated by
measuring their satisfaction levels.
Results: Twenty-seven patients undergoing plication surgery (Group 1), and 21
patients undergoing incision saphenous vein graft surgery (Group 2) were
identified. Patient satisfaction was 83.33% in group 1 and 67.14% in group 2.
Penile shortening amount (2.71±1.41 cm) was higher in group 2 than group 1
(1.14±0.91 cm).When the parameters affecting the satisfaction of the patients
are examined; There was a negative correlation between penis length (p=0.036),
presence of erectile dysfunction before surgery (p=0.009), presence of
plaque (p=0.002), presence of comorbid disease accompanying (p<0.001),
presence of repeat complaints (p=0.006) and patient satisfaction.
Conclusion: Surgical methods are recommended as the most effective treatment
methods in Peyroni disease. Providing a good preoperative information in terms
of postoperative penile shortening and curvature recurrence may increase
patient satisfaction.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Proje Numarası
yok
Kaynakça
- 1- Sommer F, Schwarzer U, Wassmer G, Bloch W, Braun M, Klotz T. Epidemiology of Peyronie-s disease. Int J Impot Res 2002;14, 379–383. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900863 2- Trost LW, Gur S, Hellstrom WJ. Pharmacological management of Peyronie’s disease. Drugs 2007;67(4):527–545. DOI: 10.2165/00003495-200767040-00004 3- Chung E, Ralph D, Kagioglu A, Garaffa G, Shamsodini A, Bivalacqua T, et al. Evidence-Based Management Guidelines on Peyronie's Disease. J Sex Med 2016;13:905-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.04.062 4- Kadıoğlu A, Salabaş E, Özmez A, Ural AF, Yücel ÖB, Ortaç M, et al. Peyronie`s disease surgery: Surgical outcomes of 268 cases. Turk J Urol 2018;44(1):10-5. DOI: 10.5152/tud.2018.87405 5- Dibenedetti DB, Nguyen D, Zografos L, Ziemiecki R, Zhou X. A Population-Based Study of Peyronie's Disease: Prevalence and Treatment Patterns in the United States. Adv Urol 2011;2011:282503. DOI: 10.1155/2011/282503 6- Smith JF, Waalsh TJ, Lue TF. Peyronie’s disease: a critical appraisal of current diagnosis and treatment. Int J Impot Res 2008;20:445-459. DOI: 10.1038/ijir.2008.30 7- Talib RA, Ibrahim MA, Canguven O. Nonsurgical treatment options in Peyronie's Disease: 2016 update. Turk J Urol. 2016;42(4):217-223. DOI: 10.5152/tud.2016.40799 8- Mobley EM, Fuchs ME, Myers JB, Brant WO. Update on plication prodedures for Peyronie’s disease and other penile deformities. Ther Adv Urol 2012;4:335-346. DOI: 10.1177/1756287212448224 9- Falcone M, Preto M, Cocci A, Garaffa G. Strategies and current practices for penile lengthening in severe Peyronie’s disease cases: a systematic review. Int J Impot Res. 2020;32(1):52-63. DOI: 10.1038/s41443-019-0189-9. 10- Pryor JP, Fitzpatrick JM. A new approach to the correction of penile deformity in Peyronie’s disease. J Urol 1979;122:622–3. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)56530-1 11- Licht MR, Lewis RW. Modified Nesbit procedure for the treatment of Peyronie’s disease: a comparative outcome analysis. J Urol 1997;158(2):460–3. 12- Syeed AH, Abbasi Z, Hargreave TB. Nesbit procedure for disabling Peyronie’s curvature: a median follow-up of 84 months. Urology 2003;61(5):999–1003. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(02)02549-9 13- van der Horst C, Martinez Portillo FJ, Seif C, Melchior D, Stübinger H, Alken P, et al. Quality of life after surgical correction of penile deviation with the Schroeder-Essed plication. Aktuelle Urol. 2003;34(2):109-14. DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-38907 14- Levine LA, Lenting EL: A surgical algorithm fort he treatment of Peyronie’s disease. J. Urol 1997;158:2149-52. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)68184-9 15- Gholami SS, Lue TF. Correction of penile curvature using the 16-dot plication technique: a review of 132 patients. J Urol 2002;167(5):2066–9. 16- Schultheiss D, Meschi MR, Hagemann J, Truss MC, Stief CG, Jonas U. Congenital and acquired penile deviation treated with the essed plication method. Eur Urol. 2000;38(2):167-71. DOI: 10.1159/000020275 17- Barrett-harlow B, Clavell-hernandez J, Wang R. New developments in surgical treatment for penile size preservation in Peyronie’ s disease. Sex Med Rev. 2019;7(1):156–66. DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.07.001 18- Tahra A, Küçük EV, İnkaya A. Peyroni hastalığının hafif ve orta şiddetli kurvatür tedavisinde plikasyon ve greftleme cerrahisi ile sonuçlarımız. Androl Bul 2017; 19(1): 6-9. DOI: 10.24898/tandro.2017.46547 19- Kadirov R, Coskun B, Kaygisiz O, Gunseren KO, Kordan Y, Yavascaoglu I, et al. Penile Plication With or Without Degloving of the Penis Results in Similar Outcomes. Sex Med. 2017;5(3):e142-e147. DOI: 10.1016/j.esxm.2017.05.001 20- Taylor FL, Levine LA. Surgical correction of Peyronie’s disease via tunica albuginea plication or partial plaque excision with pericar- dial graft: long-term follow up. J Sex Med 2008;5:2221–8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00941.x 21- El-Sakka AI, Rashwan HM, Lue TF. Venous patch graft for Peyronie’s disease. Part II. outcome analysis. J Urol. 1998;160(6 Pt 1):2050-3. DOI: 10.1097/00005392-199812010-00030 22- Montorsi F, Salonia A, Maga T, Bua L, Guazzoni G, Barbieri L, et al. Evidence-based assessment of long-term results in plaque incision and vein grafting for Peyronie’s disease. J Urol 2000;163(6):1704–8. 23- Backhaus B, Muller S, Albers P. Corporoplasty for advanced Peyronie’s disease using venous and/or dermis patch grafting: new surgical technique and long-term patient satisfaction. J Urol 2003;169(3):981–4. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000052403.11923.51 24- Yurkanin JP, Dean R, Wessells H. Effect of incision and saphenous vein grafting for Peyronie’s disease on penile length and sexual satisfaction. J Urol. 2001;166(5):1769-72; discussion 1772-3. 25- Adeniyi AA, Goorney SR, Pryor JP, Ralph DJ. The Lue procedure: an analysis of the outcome in Peyronie’s disease. BJU Int 2002;89:404–8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.01896.x 26- Kalsi J, Minhas S, Christopher N, Ralph D: The results of plaque incision and venous grafting (Lue procedure) to correct the penile deformity of Peyronie's disease. BJU Int 2005;95: 1029-33. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05459.x 27- Akman T, Sanli O, Gurkan L, Cakan M, Tezer M, Kadioglu A: Medial dissection of the neurovascular bundle in Peyronie’s patients with dorsal curvature: Demonstration of a technique and analysis of outcome. Book of Abstracts 8th Congress of the European Society for Sexual Medicine 2006; 1, A: V-01-001. 28- Kadioglu A, Sanli O, Akman T, Cakan M, Erol B, Mamadov F. Surgical treatment of Peyronie’s disease: a single center experience with 145 patients. Eur Urol 2008;53(2):432–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.04.045 29- Hsu GL, Chen HS, Hsieh CH, Chen RM, Wen HS, Liu LJ, et al. Long-term results of autologous venous grafts for penile morphological reconstruction. J Androl 2007:28(1);186–93. DOI: 10.2164/jandrol.106.000760 30- Egydio PH, Lucon AM, Arap S. Treatment of Peyronie’s disease by incomplete circumferential incision of the tunica albuginea and plaque with bovine pericardium graft. Urology. 2002;59(4):570-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01651-x 31- Chun JL, McGregor A, Krishnan R, Carson CC.. A comparison of dermal and cadaveric pericardial grafts in the modified Horton-Devine procedure for Peyronie’s disease. J Urol 2001;166(1):185–8. 32- Hatzichristodoulou G. Grafting techniques for Peyronie’ s disease. Transl Androl Urol. 2016;5:334–41. DOI: 10.21037/tau.2016.03.16 33- Hatzichristodoulou G, Osmonov D, Kübler H, Hellstrom WJG, Yafi FA. Contemporary review of grafting techniques for the surgical treatment of Peyronie’s disease. Sex Med Rev. 2017;5:544–52. DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.01.006
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | Türkçe |
|---|---|
| Konular | Üroloji |
| Bölüm | Araştırma Makalesi |
| Yazarlar | |
| Proje Numarası | yok |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 18 Eylül 2020 |
| Gönderilme Tarihi | 1 Mayıs 2020 |
| Kabul Tarihi | 1 Temmuz 2020 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2020 Cilt: 13 Sayı: 3 |
Kaynak Göster
Cited By
