|
|
CORRESPONDENCE SECTION |
|
|
|
| Year : 2002 | Volume
: 19
| Issue : 1 | Page : 95 |
| |
Priapism or Penile Prosthesis ?
Shivananda Prabhu, Erel AI Diaz, Shubha N Rao
KMC, Mangalore, India
Correspondence Address:
Shivananda Prabhu
KMC, Mangalore
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
Keywords: Priapism; Penile Prosthesis
How to cite this article:
Prabhu S, Diaz EA, Rao SN. Priapism or Penile Prosthesis ?. Indian J Urol 2002;19:95 |
A middle-aged male patient was admitted to the ICU under Neurology in a delirious condition. During examination persistent erection of the penis was noticed. Further examination showed turgid corpora cavernosa while the spongiosum and the glans were soft. A provisional diagnosis of priapism was made and treatment was planned in consultation with the urologist.
Meanwhile, patient became oriented and enlightened us by saying he had a penile prosthesis thus saving him from treatment for imagined priapism. Repeat examination failed to reveal any obvious surgical scar, nor any reservoir/pump. Presumably, patient had semi-rigid prosthesis with the surgical scar having healed well.
We are reporting this instance to highlight the fact that a penile implant should be kept in mind in the differential diagnosis of priapism especially when the patient is unable to give a proper history.[2]
 References | |  |
| 1. | Lue TF, Hellstrom WJG, McAninch JWI, Tanagho EA. Priapism: A refined approach to diagnosis and treatment. J Urol 1986; 136: 104.  |
| 2. | Dorflinger T, Bruskewitz R. AMS malleable penile prosthesis. Urology 1986: 38: 480-485. |
|
