Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Medicolegal Impacts of Penile Implant Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Penile Implant Surgery

  • 431 Accesses

Abstract

Placement of a prosthetic penile implant is the gold standard treatment for men with erectile dysfunction (ED) refractory to other treatments. The procedure has inherent risks and carries increased medicolegal liability compared to other treatments for ED. Surgeons – including urologists – are faced with a greater burden of legal challenges compared to other medical disciplines. While some medical malpractice cases are predicated on factors outside a surgeon’s control, there are steps that a surgeon can take to minimize liability when placing a penile implant. The surgeon must determine that a patient is an appropriate surgical candidate and that he and his partner can execute an applicable informed consent and thorough documentation of preoperative counseling and consenting. Issues concerning inappropriate surgical technique are most likely to lead to payout. The onus is on the surgeon to ensure appropriate training and technical skill when performing this potentially litigious procedure. Attentive and timely patient follow-up is critical. The court normally will not find fault with the surgeon after an intraoperative or postoperative complication, so long as it has not been caused by gross negligence and is addressed in a prompt and reasonable manner according to the current standard of care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Prins J, Blanker MH, Bohnen AM, Thomas S, Bosch JL. Prevalence of erectile dysfunction: a systematic review of population-based studies. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14(6):422–32. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900905.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. McKinlay JB. The worldwide prevalence and epidemiology of erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res. 2000;12(Suppl 4):S6–S11. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900567.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Akdemir F, Okulu E, Kayıgil Ö. Long-term outcomes of AMS Spectra® penile prosthesis implantation and satisfaction rates. Int J Impot Res. 2017;29(5):184–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijir.2017.16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lightner DJ, Wymer K, Sanchez J, Kavoussi L. Best practice statement on urologic procedures and antimicrobial prophylaxis. J Urol. 2020;203(2):351–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000509.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Burnett AL, Nehra A, Breau RH, et al. Erectile dysfunction: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2018;200(3):633–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.05.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hickey JD, Cowan J. Risk management and medicolegal issues in urology. BJU Int. 2000;86(3):271–4. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2000.00291.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. SMSNA. Penile prosthesis information form. Burnsville: Sexual Medicine Society of North America; 2008. http://www.smsna.org/V1/images/SMSNAIPP_policy.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  8. Henning J, Waxman S. Legal aspects of men’s genitourinary health. Int J Impot Res. 2009;21(3):165–70. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijir.2009.4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Trost LW, Baum N, Hellstrom WJ. Managing the difficult penile prosthesis patient. J Sex Med. 2013;10(4):893–907. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12115.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. DeVille K, Goldberg D, Hassler G. Malpractice risk according to physician specialty. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(20):1939–40. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1111003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sherer BA, Coogan CL. The current state of medical malpractice in urology. Urology. 2015;86(1):2–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.03.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jena AB, Seabury S, Lakdawalla D, Chandra A. Malpractice risk according to physician specialty. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(7):629–36. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1012370.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Sobel DL, Loughlin KR, Coogan CL. Medical malpractice liability in clinical urology: a survey of practicing urologists. J Urol. 2006;175(5):1847–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)01021-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kaplan GW. Malpractice risks for urologists. Urology. 1998;51(2):183–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(97)00633-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kahan SE, Goldman HB, Marengo S, Resnick MI. Urological medical malpractice. J Urol. 2001;165(5):1638–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Perrotti M, Badger W, Prader S, Moran ME. Medical malpractice in urology, 1985 to 2004: 469 consecutive cases closed with indemnity payment. J Urol. 2006;176(5):2154–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2006.07.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Badger WJ, Moran ME, Abraham C, Yarlagadda B, Perrotti M. Missed diagnoses by urologists resulting in malpractice payment. J Urol. 2007;178(6):2537–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.040.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hsieh MH, Tan AG, Meng MV. Medical malpractice in American urology: 22-year national review of the impact of caps and implications for contemporary practice. J Urol. 2008;179(5):1944–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.061.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Loughlin KR. Medical malpractice: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Urol Clin North Am. 2009;36(1):101–vii. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2008.08.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Calikoglu EO, Aras A. ‘Defensive medicine among different surgical disciplines: A descriptive cross-sectional study. J Forensic Leg Med. 2020 Jul;73:101970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2020.101970. Epub 2020 May 5. PMID: 32442116.

  21. Renkema E, Ahaus K, Broekhuis M, Tims M. Triggers of defensive medical behaviours: a cross-sectional study among physicians in the Netherlands. BMJ Open. 2019;9(6):e025108. Published 2019 Jun 25. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025108.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Papillon F, Cormier L, Legeais D. Risque médico-légal en urologie: analyse d’un portefeuille d’assurés auprès d’une compagnie d’assurances française entre 2009 et 2018 [Medico-legal risk in urology: Analysis of a portfolio of insured persons by a French insurance company between 2009 and 2018]. Prog Urol. 2019;29(1):18–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2018.10.002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shin SH, Kim SY, Jang SG, Lee W. Analysis of closed medical litigation in urology. Investig Clin Urol. 2017;58(5):317–23. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2017.58.5.317.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Stimson CJ, Pichert JW, Moore IN, et al. Medical malpractice claims risk in urology: an empirical analysis of patient complaint data. J Urol. 2010;183(5):1971–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.01.027.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vincent C, Young M, Phillips A. Why do people sue doctors? A study of patients and relatives taking legal action. Lancet. 1994;343(8913):1609–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(94)93062-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Levinson W, Roter DL, Mullooly JP, Dull VT, Frankel RM. Physician-patient communication. The relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons. JAMA. 1997;277(7):553–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.277.7.553.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tsimtsiou Z, Kirana P, Hatzimouratidis K, Hatzichristou D. What is the profile of patients thinking of litigation? Results from the hospitalized and outpatients’ profile and expectations study. Hippokratia. 2014;18(2):139–43.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Benson JS, Coogan CL. Urological malpractice: analysis of indemnity and claim data from 1985 to 2007. J Urol. 2010;184(3):1086–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Boscolo-Berto R. Legal claims and bias in creating clinical practice guidelines: which step in which direction? Int J Urol. 2010;17(5):498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2010.02501.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Trost L. Consenting the patient for penile implant surgery. J Sex Med. 2020;17(1):4–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.10.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sunaryo PL, Colaco M, Terlecki R. Penile prostheses and the litigious patient: a legal database review. J Sex Med. 2014;11(10):2589–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12649.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wenger v. Oregon Urology Clinic, P.C., 102 Ore. App. 665, 796 P.2d 376, 1990 Ore. App. LEXIS 873 (Court of Appeals of Oregon August 1, 1990, Filed).

    Google Scholar 

  33. 677.097 Procedure to obtain informed consent of patient., ORS § 677.097 (The Oregon Annotated Statutes is current through the 2019 and 2020 Regular Session. Some sections may have multiple variants due to amendments by multiple acts. Revision and codification by the Legislative Counsel are updated as available, see ORS 173.111 et seq. For sections pending codification by the Legislative Counsel, see Newly Added Sections in the Table of Contents.)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Scherzer ND, Dick B, Gabrielson AT, Alzweri LM, Hellstrom WJG. Penile prosthesis complications: planning, prevention, and decision making. Sex Med Rev. 2019;7(2):349–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.04.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kramer AC, Schweber A. Patient expectations prior to Coloplast titan penile prosthesis implant predicts postoperative satisfaction. J Sex Med. 2010;7(6):2261–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.01799.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chason J, Sausville J, Kramer AC. Penile prosthesis implantation compares favorably in malpractice outcomes to other common urological procedures: findings from a malpractice insurance database. J Sex Med. 2009;6(8):2111–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01317.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Stelfox HT, Gandhi TK, Orav EJ, Gustafson ML. The relation of patient satisfaction with complaints against physicians and malpractice lawsuits. Am J Med. 2005;118(10):1126–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.01.060.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Montague DK, Angermeir KW. Surgical approaches for penile prosthesis implantation: penoscrotal vs infrapubic. Int J Impot Res. 2003;15(Suppl 5):S134–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3901089.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Levine LA, Hoeh MP. Review of penile prosthetic reservoir: complications and presentation of a modified reservoir placement technique. J Sex Med. 2012;9(11):2759–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02807.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Levine LA, Becher EF, Bella AJ, et al. Penile prosthesis surgery: current recommendations from the international consultation on sexual medicine [published correction appears in J Sex Med. 2016 Jul;13(7):1145]. J Sex Med. 2016;13(4):489–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.01.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bayrak O, Erturhan S, Seckiner I, Ozturk M, Sen H, Erbagci A. Comparison of the patient’s satisfaction underwent penile prosthesis; Malleable versus Ambicor: single center experience. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020;92(1):25–9. Published 2020 Apr 6. https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2020.1.25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Oberlin DT, Matulewicz RS, Bachrach L, Hofer MD, Brannigan RE, Flury SC. National practice patterns of treatment of erectile dysfunction with penile prosthesis implantation. J Urol. 2015;193(6):2040–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.11.095.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Trost L. Future considerations in prosthetic urology. Asian J Androl. 2020;22(1):70–5. https://doi.org/10.4103/aja.aja_103_19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Henry GD, Kansal NS, Callaway M, et al. Centers of excellence concept and penile prostheses: an outcome analysis. J Urol. 2009;181(3):1264–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.10.157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lentz AC, Rodríguez D, Davis LG, et al. Simulation training in penile implant surgery: assessment of surgical confidence and knowledge with cadaveric laboratory training. Sex Med. 2018;6(4):332–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esxm.2018.09.001.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Bailey V. Emiliio C. Chu, M.D., Inc., 80 Ohio App. 3d 627, 610 N.E. 2d 531 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Gautieri v. U.S., 167 F. Supp. 2d 207, 209 (D.R.I.2001).

    Google Scholar 

  48. American Urological Association. Expert witness testimony in medical liability cases. Available at: http://www.auanet.org/about/policy-statements/testimony-in-medical-liability-cases.cfm. Accessed 16 June 2020.

  49. Sunaryo PL, Svider PF, Jackson-Rosario I, Eloy JA. Expert witness testimony in urology malpractice litigation. Urology. 2014;83(4):704–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.11.045.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Narang GL, Figler BD, Coward RM. Preoperative counseling and expectation management for inflatable penile prosthesis implantation. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6(Suppl 5):S869–80. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2017.07.04.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Gross MS, Phillips EA, Carrasquillo RJ, et al. Multicenter investigation of the micro-organisms involved in penile prosthesis infection: an analysis of the efficacy of the AUA and EAU guidelines for penile prosthesis prophylaxis. J Sex Med. 2017;14(3):455–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2017.01.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Weinstock Kurzer, M.D., 03 FJVR 1-44, 2002 WL 32128165 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Hyde v. Toole, 8 Nat. J.V.R.A. 12:12, 1000 WL 183947.

    Google Scholar 

  54. SMSNA. Penile Prosthesis Information Form. Available online at: https://www.smsna.org/V1/images/SMSNAIPP_policy.pdf.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We give special thanks to Jessica Daigle for her assistance in the preparation and submission of this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA

    Caleb Natale, Gabe Leinwand, Michael Polchert & Wayne J. G. Hellstrom

Authors
  1. Caleb Natale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gabe Leinwand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Polchert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wayne J. G. Hellstrom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wayne J. G. Hellstrom .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Urology Division, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil

    Eduardo P. Miranda

  2. Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    John P. Mulhall

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Natale, C., Leinwand, G., Polchert, M., Hellstrom, W.J.G. (2022). Medicolegal Impacts of Penile Implant Surgery. In: Miranda, E.P., Mulhall, J.P. (eds) Penile Implant Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82363-4_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82363-4_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-82362-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-82363-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation