Home  |   Archive  |   Online Submission  |   News & Events  |   Subscribe  |   APFA  |   Society  |   Contact Us  |   中文版
Search   
 
Journal

Ahead of print
Authors' Accepted
    Manuscripts
new!
Current Issue
Archive
Acknowledgments
Special Issues
Browse by Category

Manuscript Submission

Online Submission
Online Review
Instruction for Authors
Instruction for Reviewers
English Corner new!

About AJA

About AJA
Editorial Board
Contact Us
News

Resources & Services

Advertisement
Subscription
Email alert
Proceedings
Reprints

Download area

Copyright licence
EndNote style file
Manuscript word template
Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in English)

Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in Chinese)

Proof-reading for the
    authors

AJA Club (in English)
AJA Club (in Chinese)

 
Abstract

Volume 28, Issue 1 (January 2026) 28, 16–22; 10.4103/aja202593

Penile implant reservoir placement methods: is there a gold standard?

Sedigh, Omid1; Soleimanzadeh, Farzin2; Buffi, Nicolò3; Tondroanamag, Farhad2; Gobbo, Andrea4; Tallari, Alessandro1; Zehisaadat, Mahsa2; Tahmasbi, Fateme2; Alnadhari, Ibrahim5; Shamsodini, Ahmad5; Hosseini, Seyed Jalil6; Ralph, David J7; Bettocchi, Carlo8

1Urology and Reconstructive Andrology Department, Humanitas Gradenigo Hospital, Torino 10125410158, Italy

2Research Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Iranian EBM Centre: A JBI Centre of Excellence, Faculty of Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz 5166614766, Iran

3Department of Biochemical Science, Humanitas University, Milan 20129, Italy

4Department of Urology, University College London Hospital, London W1G 8PH, United Kingdom

5Al Wakra Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation, Al Wakra 3050, Qatar

6Men’s Health and Reproductive Health Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 3050, Iran

7Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals, Great Britain, London NW1 2PB, United Kingdom

8Department of Andrology and Male Genitalia Reconstructive Surgery, University of Foggia, Foggia 70126, Italy

Correspondence: Dr. F Tondroanamag (farhadtond@gmail.com)

Received: 08 February 2025; Accepted: 22 October 2025; published online: 09 January 2026

Abstract

Erectile dysfunction (ED), a condition affecting nearly 150 million men worldwide, is expected to impact over 300 million by 2025. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5Is) remain the first-line treatment for ED, yet a subset of patients exhibit inadequate responses. For these individuals, the inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) offers an effective alternative, with the three-piece IPP being particularly favored for its high satisfaction and low complication rates. However, the challenge of optimal reservoir placement, particularly in the extraperitoneal space of Retzius (SOR), has prompted investigations into alternative approaches. SOR placement is associated with complications, such as injury to iliac vessels, bladder puncture, and bowel perforation. Various alternative sites have been proposed, including epigastric extraperitoneal, intraperitoneal (IP), high submuscular (HSM), and lateral retroperitoneal (LRP) positions, each aiming to mitigate these risks while improving patient outcomes. Comparative studies have shown that methods such as IP and HSM reduce the risk of vessel compression and bladder injury, often yielding higher satisfaction rates compared with SOR. However, each technique carries unique drawbacks, including risks of palpability, improper placement, and longer operative times. This review synthesizes current evidence on reservoir placement strategies, evaluates their advantages and limitations, and highlights crucial considerations for patient selection, providing a comprehensive overview of IPP implantation techniques and their evolving roles in the management of ED.

Keywords: erectile dysfunction; penile diseases; penile prosthesis

Full Text | PDF |

 
Browse:  7
 
Asian Journal of Andrology CN 31-1795/R ISSN 1008-682X  Copyright © 2023  Shanghai Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences.  All rights reserved.