Penectomy for Penile Malignancy Quality of Life and Sexual Disorders

  • Elena Vittoria Longhi
  • Leonardo Misuraca


The surgical treatment of penectomy, whether conservative or radical, is a complex pathology in terms of the emotional, psychic, and psychiatric impact on the patient and family. In this as in no other disease, the multidisciplinary approach becomes indispensable, as do the clinical follow-up 3 months after surgical treatment and psychosexological support throughout the first year after hospital discharge. The scientific literature often provides us with conflicting data: the voices of patients and partners are the only ones to reveal uncomfortable truths filled with emotion.


Penis cancer Conservative surgery Surgery breaks down Castration Body image Psychiatric disorders Suicidal ideation The therapeutic value of the nurse The partners 


  1. 1.
    Pettaway CA et al (2007) Penile cancer. In: Wein AJ et al (eds) Campbell-Walsh urology, vol 207, 9th edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 959–992Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pow Sang MR et al (2010) Epidemiology and history of penile cancer. Urology 76:S2–S6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camidge DR et al (2007) Hospital admissions and deaths about self-inflicted wounds and accidents within 5 years from the international cancer diagnosis: a national study in Scotland, United Kingdom. Br J Cancer 96:752–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Maddineni SB et al (2009) Identifying the needs of patients with cancer of the penis: a systemic review of the quality of life, psychosexual and psychosocial literature on penile cancer. BMC Urol 9:8–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Romero FR et al (2005) Sexual function after partial penectomy for penile cancer. J Urol 66:1292–1295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gulino G et al (2007) Distal urethral reconstruction of the Glans penis cancer: results of a new technique to 1 year of follow-up. J Urol 178:941–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D’Ancona CA et al (1997) Quality of life after partial penectomy for penile cancer. J Urol 50:593–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ficarra V et al (2000) General health and psychological well-being in patients undergoing surgery for Urologic malignancies. Urol Int 65:130–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scarberry K et al (2015) Results for organ sparing surgery for cancer of the penis. Sex Med 3(2):62–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kieffer JM et al (2014) Quality of life for patients treated for penile cancer. J Urol 192(4):1105–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ku TK, Minas H (2010) Development of the nursing relationships scale: a measure of interpersonal approaches in nursing care. Int J Ment Health Syst 4:12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sahlsten MJ, Larsson IE, Sjöström B et al (2007) Patient participation in nursing care: towards a concept clarification from a nurse perspective. J Clin Nurs 16(4):630–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sahlsten MJ, Larsson IE, Sjöström B et al (2008) An analysis of the concept of patient participation. Nurs Forum 43(1):2–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Anderberg P, Lepp M, Berglund AL et al (2007) Preserving dignity in caring for older adults: a concept analysis. J Adv Nurs 59(6):635–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hobbs JL (2009) A dimensional analysis of patient-centered care. Nurs Res 58(1):52–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elena Vittoria Longhi
    • 1
  • Leonardo Misuraca
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Urology, Sexual Medical CenterIRCCS San Raphael Hospital, Vita and Salute UniversityMilanItaly
  2. 2.“Regina Elena” National Cancer InstituteRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations