Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41429929›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2025

Penile prosthesis implantation following conservative surgical treatment for penile cancer: anatomical and surgical considerations.

Fakhri Rahman, Hussain M Alnajjar, Asif Muneer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of impotence research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Surgical considerations in prosthetic urology.International journal of impotence research · 2026
    Article
  2. Top ten surgical tricks-penile prosthesis with corporal fibrosis.International journal of impotence research · 2026
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Fakhri RahmanDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, UCL, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6363-7218
Hussain M AlnajjarDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, UCL, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6364-0310
Asif MuneerDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, UCL, London, UK. asif.muneer@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2958-1614

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Penile prosthesis implantation following penile cancer surgery presents a unique set of challenges. While penile sparing surgery, such as glansectomy and partial penectomy, aim to preserve urinary and sexual function, erectile dysfunction remains a consequence due to tissue loss and psychological distress. This review explores erectile function outcome following glansectomy and partial penectomy and provides practical framework for penile prosthesis implantation in this context. Specific considerations include anatomical changes, surgical timing and approach, prosthesis choice, patient counselling, and follow-up care. The selection of a penile prosthesis device should be individualized. Oversizing should be avoided, and downsizing should be considered, particularly in cases with significant corporal fibrosis. Moreover, inflatable penile prostheses are generally preferred, but malleable devices remain useful in selected cases, particularly following partial penectomy to facilitate unburying of the penis. Surgical strategies must account for altered penile and urethral anatomy to avoid complications such as urethral injury and prosthesis erosion. Post-prosthesis cancer surveillance remains essential and should adhere to current guidelines for penile cancer. A multidisciplinary approach and tailored surgical planning are essential to achieve satisfactory outcomes while maintaining oncological safety.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.