Current opinions on the management of prolonged ischemic priapism: does penoscrotal decompression outperform corporoglanular tunneling?

Prolonged ischemic priapism presents a treatment challenge given the difficulty in achieving detumescence and effects on sexual function. To evaluate current practice patterns, an open, web-based multi-institutional survey querying surgeons' experience with and perceived efficacy of tunneling maneuvers (corporoglanular tunneling and penoscrotal decompression), as well as impressions of erectile recovery, was administered to members of societies specializing in male genital surgery. Following distribution, 141 responses were received. Tunneling procedures were the favored first-line surgical intervention in the prolonged setting (99/139, 71.2% tunneling vs. 14/139, 10.1% implant, p < .001). Although respondents were more likely to have performed corporoglanular tunneling than penoscrotal decompression (124/138, 89.9% vs. 86/137, 62.8%, p < .001), penoscrotal decompression was perceived as more effective among those who had performed both (47.3% Very or Extremely Effective for penoscrotal decompression vs. 18.7% for corporoglanular tunneling; p < .001). Many respondents who had performed both tunneling procedures felt that most regained meaningful sexual function after either corporoglanular tunneling or penoscrotal decompression (33/75, 44.0% vs. 33/74, 44.6%, p = .942). While further patient-centered investigation is warranted, this study suggests that penoscrotal decompression may outperform corporoglanular tunneling for prolonged priapism, and that recovery of sexual function may be higher than previously thought after tunneling procedures