Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Erectile dysfunction and Peyronie’s disease diagnosis rates after penile fracture—a retrospective claims database cohort analysis

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 36, pages 125–128 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Our objective was to analyze the rates of erectile dysfunction and Peyronie’s disease following a penile fracture using a large, multi-institutional claims database. Inclusion criteria included men ages 15 or older with a diagnosis of penile fracture and any office visit within 5 years of the penile fracture. Exclusion criteria included prior erectile dysfunction, prescription of erectile aids, or penile prosthesis placement. Our primary outcome was the diagnosis of erectile dysfunction or prescription of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors within 5 years. A secondary analysis assessed rates of Peyronie’s disease following penile fracture. 1242 men were identified with penile fracture and subsequently matched to men without penile fracture, resulting in equal cohorts of 1227 men. Men with a history of penile fracture were more likely to receive a diagnosis of erectile dysfunction or require phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (RR 3.18, 95% CI: 2.30–4.40). Men who did not undergo immediate repair had higher rates of erectile dysfunction or treatment (RR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.22–2.78). Men over the age of 45 years who had a penile fracture were more likely to develop erectile dysfunction or treatment compared to men under 45 years (RR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.14–2.39). Rates of Peyronie’s disease were higher in men with a history of penile fracture (5.8% vs 0%, p < 0.0001). Rates of Peyronie’s disease were lower if immediate repair of the fracture was performed (RR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.10–0.41). Men over the age of 45 years with penile fracture were more likely to develop Peyronie’s Disease within 5 years compared to men under the age of 45 years penile fracture (RR: 3.72, 95% CI: 1.94–7.16). Penile fracture increases the risk of both erectile dysfunction and Peyronie’s disease, especially those treated with conservative measures or over the age of 45 years compared to patients under 45 years with a penile fracture.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data regarding any of the subjects in the study has not been previously published. Available data will be made available to the editors of the journal for review or query upon request.

References

  1. Garaffa G, Raheem AA, Ralph DJ. Penile fracture and penile reconstruction. Curr Urol Rep. 2011;12:427–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Aaronson DS, Shindel AW. US national statistics on penile fracture. J Sex Med. 2010;7:3226.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Amer T, Wilson R, Chlosta P, AlBuheissi S, Qazi H, Fraser M, et al. Penile fracture: a meta-analysis. Urol Int. 2016;96:315–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Muentener M, Suter S, Hauri D, Sulser T. Long-term experience with surgical and conservative treatment of penile fracture. J Urol. 2004;172:576–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gamal WM, Osman MM, Hammady A, Aldahshoury MZ, Hussein MM, Saleem M. Penile fracture: long-term results of surgical and conservative management. J Trauma. 2011;71:491–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hatzichristodoulou G, Dorstewitz A, Gschwend JE, Herkommer K, Zantl N. Surgical management of penile fracture and long-term outcome on erectile function and voiding. J Sex Med. 2013;10:1424–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. El-Assmy A, El-Tholoth HS, Abou-El-Ghar ME, Mohsen T, Ibrahiem EH. Risk factors of erectile dysfunction and penile vascular changes after surgical repair of penile fracture. Int J Impot Res. 2012;24:20–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sharma G, Mandal S, Bhowmik P, Gupta P, Bahal B, Sharma PK. Sexual function outcomes and risk factors of erectile dysfunction after surgical repair of penile fracture. Turk J Urol. 2021;47:106–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mulhall JP, Luo X, Zou KH, Stecher V, Galaznik A. Relationship between age and erectile dysfunction diagnosis or treatment using real-world observational data in the USA. Int J Clin Pr. 2016;70:1012–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Aversa A, Bruzziches R, Francomano D, Natali M, Gareri P, Spera G. Endothelial dysfunction and erectile dysfunction in the aging man. Int J Urol. 2010;17:38–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Burnett AL. The role of nitric oxide in erectile dysfunction: implications for medical therapy. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2006;8:53–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ortac M, Özgor F, Caglar U, Esmeray A, Savun M, Sarılar Ö. Older age and a large tunical tear may be predictors of increased erectile dysfunction rates following penile fracture surgery. Int J Impot Res. 2020;32:226–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Munarriz RM, Yan QR, ZNehra A, Udelson D, Goldstein I. Blunt trauma: the pathophysiology of hemodynamic injury leading to erectile dysfunction. J Urol. 1995;153:1831–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Penson DF, Seftel AD, Krane RJ, Frohrib D, Goldstein I. The hemodynamic pathophysiology of impotence following blunt trauma to the erect penis. J Urol. 1992;148:1171–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Acikgoz A, Gokce E, Asci R, Buyukalpelli R, Yilmaz AF, Sarikaya S. Relationship between penile fracture and Peyronie’s disease: a prospective study. Int J Impot Res. 2011;23:165–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Zargooshi J. Trauma as the cause of Peyronie’s disease: penile fracture as a model of trauma. J Urol. 2004;172:186–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lindsay MB, Schain DM, Grambsch P, Benson RC, Beard CM, Kurland LT. The incidence of Peyronie’s disease in Rochester, Minnesota, 1950 through 1984. J Urol. 1991;146:1007–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Devine CJ Jr, Somers KD, Jordan SG, Schlossberg SM. Proposal: trauma as the cause of the Peyronie’s lesion. J Urol. 1997;157:285–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Quan H, Li B, Saunders LD, Parsons GA, Nilsson CI, Alibhai A, et al. Assessing validity of ICD‐9‐CM and ICD‐10 administrative data in recording clinical conditions in a unique dually coded database. Health Serv Res. 2008;43:1424–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the reviewers of this paper for providing helpful feedback.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Ankith P. Maremanda & William Du Comb

  2. The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    William Du Comb, Taylor P. Kohn, Selman Unal & Arthur L. Burnett

  3. University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA

    Corey Able

Authors
  1. Ankith P. Maremanda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William Du Comb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Corey Able
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Taylor P. Kohn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Selman Unal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Arthur L. Burnett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

APM: Manuscript writing and editing, data analysis. WDC: Project development, data collection and management, data analysis, manuscript writing and editing. CA: Manuscript writing and editing. TPK: Project development, data collection and management, data analysis, manuscript writing and editing. ALB: Project development, data analysis, manuscript editing, supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arthur L. Burnett.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval

This study is exempt from the Johns Hopkins Institutional Review Board.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maremanda, A.P., Du Comb, W., Able, C. et al. Erectile dysfunction and Peyronie’s disease diagnosis rates after penile fracture—a retrospective claims database cohort analysis. Int J Impot Res 36, 125–128 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00746-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00746-w

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links