Advertisement

Satisfaction With Testicular Prosthesis After Radical Orchiectomy

Published:December 27, 2017DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.12.006

      Objectives

      To determine patient satisfaction with testicular prostheses (TP) for testicular cancer. Reconstruction represents an important part of surgical oncology, yet placement of TP following orchiectomy is infrequently performed. Improved data on patient satisfaction with TP would help in counseling patients with testicular cancer.

      Materials and Methods

      Forty patients who underwent orchiectomy and TP placement for testicular cancer participated in a survey that was blinded to the providers in an outpatient clinic (2012-2014) to evaluate TP satisfaction. Categorical variables associated with satisfaction were compared using the Fisher's exact test.

      Results

      Median age at TP placement was 31 years (17-59). Most patients had their prosthesis in place for >1 year (81%) at the time of the survey. No patient reported complications from the TP and none underwent explantation. All patients felt that being offered an implant before orchiectomy was important. Overall, 33 patients (82.5%) rated the TP as good or excellent, and 35 men (87.5%) would have the prosthesis implanted again. Thirty-seven patients (92.5%) found the TP to be comfortable or very comfortable. However, 44% considered the TP too firm and 20% felt the position was not appropriate. Appropriate size, appropriate position, and TP comfort were significantly associated with good or excellent overall TP satisfaction (P < .05).

      Conclusion

      Overall satisfaction with testicular implants after orchiectomy for testicular cancer is high. Patients should be offered a testicular prosthesis, especially at the time of orchiectomy. Efforts should be made to optimize implant firmness, and care should be given to proper size selection and positioning.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Urology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Skoogh J.
        • Steineck G.
        • Cavallin-Stahl E.
        • et al.
        Feelings of loss and uneasiness or shame after removal of a testicle by orchidectomy: a population-based long-term follow-up of testicular cancer survivors.
        Int J Androl. 2011; 34: 183
        • Rossen P.
        • Pedersen A.F.
        • Zachariae R.
        • et al.
        Sexuality and body image in long-term survivors of testicular cancer.
        Eur J Cancer. 2012; 48: 571
        • Beer M.
        • Kay R.
        Testicular prostheses.
        Urol Clin North Am. 1989; 16: 133
        • Marshall S.
        Potential problems with testicular prostheses.
        Urology. 1986; 28: 388
        • Robinson R.
        • Tait C.D.
        • Clarke N.W.
        • et al.
        Is it safe to insert a testicular prosthesis at the time of radical orchidectomy for testis cancer: an audit of 904 men undergoing radical orchidectomy.
        BJU Int. 2016; 117: 249
        • Girsdansky J.
        • Newman H.F.
        Use of a vitallium testicular implant.
        Am J Surg. 1941; 53: 514
        • Turek P.J.
        • Master V.A.
        • Testicular Prosthesis Study Group
        Safety and effectiveness of a new saline filled testicular prosthesis.
        J Urol. 2004; 172: 1427
        • Adshead J.
        • Khoubehi B.
        • Wood J.
        • et al.
        Testicular implants and patient satisfaction: a questionnaire-based study of men after orchidectomy for testicular cancer.
        BJU Int. 2001; 88: 559
        • Boy D.
        • Carl P.
        Acceptance of silicone testicular prostheses in long-term follow-up.
        Urologe A. 2002; 41: 462
        • Dieckmann K.P.
        • Anheuser P.
        • Schmidt S.
        • et al.
        Testicular prostheses in patients with testicular cancer—acceptance rate and patient satisfaction.
        BMC Urol. 2015; 15: 16
        • Incrocci L.
        • Bosch J.L.
        • Slob A.K.
        Testicular prostheses: body image and sexual functioning.
        BJU Int. 1999; 84: 1043
        • Lynch M.J.
        • Pryor J.P.
        Testicular prostheses: the patient's perception.
        Br J Urol. 1992; 70: 420
        • Xylinas E.
        • Martinache G.
        • Azancot V.
        • et al.
        Testicular implants, patient's and partner's satisfaction: a questionnaire-based study of men after orchidectomy.
        Prog Urol. 2008; 18: 1082
        • Yossepowitch O.
        • Aviv D.
        • Wainchwaig L.
        • et al.
        Testicular prostheses for testis cancer survivors: patient perspectives and predictors of long-term satisfaction.
        J Urol. 2011; 186: 2249
        • Catanzariti F.
        • Polito B.
        • Polito M.
        Testicular prosthesis: patient satisfaction and sexual dysfunctions in testis cancer survivors.
        Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2016; 88: 186
        • Bodiwala D.
        • Summerton D.J.
        • Terry T.R.
        Testicular prostheses: development and modern usage.
        Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2007; 89: 349
        • Kapp M.
        Nut Job.
        in: Vanity Fair. Condé Nast, New York2010
        • Klassen A.F.
        • Pusic A.L.
        • Scott A.
        • et al.
        Satisfaction and quality of life in women who undergo breast surgery: a qualitative study.
        BMC Womens Health. 2009; 9: 11
        • Jagsi R.
        • Li Y.
        • Morrow M.
        • et al.
        Patient-reported quality of life and satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes after breast conservation and mastectomy with and without reconstruction: results of a survey of breast cancer survivors.
        Ann Surg. 2015; 261: 1198
        • Albornoz C.R.
        • Bach P.B.
        • Mehrara B.J.
        • et al.
        A paradigm shift in U.S. breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013; 131: 15
        • Zilberman D.
        • Winkler H.
        • Kleinmann N.
        • et al.
        Testicular prosthesis insertion following testicular loss or atrophy during early childhood—technical aspects and evaluation of patient satisfaction.
        J Pediatr Urol. 2007; 3: 461
        • Martinez Y.
        • Millan A.
        • Gilabert R.
        • et al.
        Study of satisfaction of testicular prosthesis implantation in children.
        Cir Pediatr. 2012; 25: 20