114 Penile Prosthesis Can Safely and Easily Be Inserted in Patients with Peyronie's Disease: Results of the PROPPER Study

Assess efficacy, safety, and overall satisfaction of AMS 700 penile prosthesis (PP) placement in men with Peyronie's disease (PD) versus non−Peyronie’s disease (NPD) using the Prospective Registry of Outcomes with Penile Prosthesis for Erectile Restoration (PROPPER). The PROPPER registry prospectively evaluates outcomes in men undergoing penile prosthesis. Men complete questionnaires at baseline and annually out to 5 years. 1038 men underwent insertion of AMS 700 at 11 sites. This is an on−going study; one and two year data is available on 595 (57.3%) patients and 375 (36.1%), respectively. PD patients (n=223) were compared to NPD patients (n=815). Intra−operatively, patients with PD had significantly greater corporal fibrosis than NPD patients (53.2% vs 24.0% (p<0.001)). When operative times were reported there was a significant difference between PD and NPD patients (53.7±35.2 min vs 46.0±27.8 min (p=0.002)). PD patients (44.4%) were more likely to receive a CX cylinder compared to NPD patients (34.6%), while NPD patients (53.1%) were more likely to receive a LGX cylinder compared to PD patients (43.5%). At baseline, men with PD were more likely to report being depressed compared to NPD men (20.0% vs 13.8%, p=0.050). At one and two years follow−up, there was no difference in self− reported depression between the two groups (p=0.277 and p=0.704, respectively). Over 75% of PD and NPD patients were satisfied or very satisfied at 1 and 2 year follow−up and there was no significant differences in patient satisfaction scores between these two groups. There were no differences between PD and NPD patient outcomes in terms of AE (7.2% vs 7.1% (p=0.976)), treatment related AE (6.3% vs 5.8% (p=0.774), device related AE (2.7% vs 3.9% (p=0.384)), device malfunction (1.3% vs 1.5% (p=0.888)), and revision surgery (1.3% vs 3.2% (p=0.139)).