Analysis of the quality of life and patient satisfaction with the results of testicular prosthetics

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Satisfaction with the results is a complex and poorly studied aspect of testicular prosthetics, which currently has no comprehensive consecration in the literature. There are no works that are based on a comprehensive view of the problem, from a subjective analysis of the local physical characteristics of the implant itself and the aesthetic perception of one’s body to assessing the impact of prosthetics on the patient’s sex life and socialization.

AIM: The aim of this study is to evaluate the results of testicular prosthetics using an original questionnaire reflecting satisfaction with the physical characteristics of the implant, sexual behavior characteristics and the socio-psychological status of the patient.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Questionnaires of 236 patients were analyzed — 112 adults 1 year after prosthetics and 124 adolescents after reaching 18 years of age with a period after surgery from 1 to 8 years. The survey was carried out using an original questionnaire that included 15 questions reflecting various aspects of the patient’s attitude to the results of prosthetics.

RESULTS: Overall satisfaction with prosthetics was more than 90% in both groups, prevailing in patients operated on in adolescence. The greatest satisfaction with prosthetics was noted in patients after testicular torsion and trauma, less satisfaction in patients with cryptorchidism, testicular hypoplasia, and monorchidism. When analyzing the patient’s interest in this procedure depending on the period before prosthetics, it was noted that satisfaction does not tend to decrease over time, up to a 10-year interval between the loss of the gonad and prosthetics. Requirements for the final result of prosthetics tend to increase in more educated patients. The results of the survey demonstrate the greatest demands for prosthetics in patients in the age group of 21–30 years as the most sexually active age category.

CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction with modern implant prosthetics is quite high — at least 90%. However, these values are not maximum and leave room for further optimization of this method, which follows from the lack of a maximum assessment of satisfaction with the results of prosthetics — for all criteria the indicators do not exceed 95%.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

I. S. Shormanov

Yaroslavl State Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: i-s-shormanov@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2062-0421
SPIN-code: 7772-8420
Scopus Author ID: 6507085029

MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine), Professor

Russian Federation, 5 Revolutsionnaya st., Yaroslavl, 150000

Dmitry N. Shchedrov

Yaroslavl State Medical University; Regional Pediatric Clinical Hospital

Email: shedrov.dmitry@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0686-0445
SPIN-code: 7354-7379

MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine)

Russian Federation, 5 Revolutsionnaya st., Yaroslavl, 150000; Yaroslavl

Yulia S. Spasskaya

Regional Pediatric Clinical Hospital

Email: ys.spasskaya@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0004-1373-6946

MD

Russian Federation, Yaroslavl

Darya Yu. Garova

Yaroslavl State Medical University; Central City Hospital

Email: dar.garova@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4457-9694
SPIN-code: 5789-8889

Assistant of the Department of Urology with Nephrology; Pediatric urologist-andrologist

Russian Federation, 5 Revolutsionnaya st., Yaroslavl, 150000; Yaroslavl

References

  1. Shchedrov DN. Reproductive health status of patients who underwent testicular torsion in childhood [dissertation]. Yaroslavl, 2019. 307 p. (In Russ.)
  2. Clifford TG, Burg ML, Hu B, et al. Satisfaction with testicular prosthesis after radical orchiectomy. Urology. 2018;114:128–132. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.12.006
  3. Legemate CM, de Rooij FPW, Bouman MB, et al. Surgical outcomes of testicular prostheses implantation in transgender men with a history of prosthesis extrusion or infection. Int J Transgend Health. 2020;22(3):330–336. doi: 10.1080/26895269.2020.1840476
  4. Ramos SA, Pinheiro AM, Barcelos AP, et al. Satisfaction with testicular prosthesis: a Portuguese questionnaire-based study in testicular cancer survivors. Rev Int Androl. 2022;20(2):110–115. doi: 10.1016/j.androl.2020.10.006
  5. Chen H-X, Ning Y, Cai Z-K, et al. Safety and effectiveness of testicular prosthesis implantation for testis loss: clinical observation of 18 cases. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2012;18(4):349–352.
  6. Zilberman D, Winkler H, Kleinmann N. Testicular prosthesis insertion following testicular loss or atrophy during early childhood — technical aspect and evaluation of patient satisfaction. J Pediatr Urol. 2007;3(6):461–465. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2007.05.006
  7. Kogan S. The clinical utility of testicular prosthesis placement in children with genital and testicular disorders. Transl Androl Urol. 2014;3(4):391–397. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2014.12.06
  8. Incrocci L, Bosch JL, Slob AK. Testicular prostheses: body image and sexual functioning. BJU Int. 1999;84(9):1043–1045. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00347.x
  9. Skewes J, Chen MY, Forrestal D, et al. 3D printing improved testicular prostheses: using lattice infill structure to modify mechanical properties. Front Surg. 2021;8:626143. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.626143
  10. Park H-J, Kim D-K, Lee BW, et al. Development of device for patient-specific artificial testicle using 3D printing. Int J Eng Res Technol. 2019;12(12):2863–2866.
  11. Araújo AS, Anacleto S, Rodrigues R, et al. Testicular prostheses — impact on quality of life and sexual function. Asian J Androl. 2023;26(2):160–164. doi: 10.4103/aja202325
  12. Shormanov IS, Shchedrov DN. Medical and social rehabilitation following testicular prosthesis in post-orchiectomy patients. Urology reports (St. Petersburg). 2018;8(2):43–52. EDN: XTMHCP doi: 10.17816/uroved8243-5
  13. Catanzariti F, Polito B, Polito M. Testicular prosthesis: Patient satisfaction and sexual dysfunctions in testis cancer survivors. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2016;88(3):186–188. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2016.3.186

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
2. Fig. 1. Demand by patients for observation by a urologist, depending on the cause of gonad loss *Differences compared with the groups “Testicular Torsion”, “Cryptorchidism” and “Testicular Trauma” are significant (p < 0.05)

Download (153KB)
3. Fig. 2. The demand for patients to be monitored by a urologist, depending on the period between orchectomy and prosthetics. *Differences with groups «<1 year» and «1–3 years» are significant (p < 0.05)

Download (160KB)
4. Fig. 3. The demand for patients to be monitored by a urologist, depending on the level of education

Download (172KB)
5. Fig. 4. The demand for patients to be monitored by a urologist, depending on age

Download (135KB)

Copyright (c) 2024 Eco-Vector



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ №ФС77-65570 от 04 мая 2016 г.


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies