What are risks, complications, and long-term outcomes of penile injection therapy?

Checked on December 9, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Penile (intracavernosal) injection therapy reliably produces erections but carries known acute risks — most importantly priapism (prolonged erection that can cause permanent tissue damage) — reported in multiple clinical sources and patient guides [1] [2] [3]. Long‑term problems reported across studies include penile fibrosis/nodules and injection‑site bruising or pain; discontinuation rates are substantial, with many men switching to other therapies over years [4] [5] [6].

1. What the immediate risks look like — priapism and cardiovascular signals

Clinics and cancer centers warn that priapism — an erection lasting more than 4 hours — is a known risk of penile injections and requires immediate care because prolonged events can cause permanent tissue damage and erectile dysfunction [1] [2]. Some centers note erections lasting as long as six hours have been reported and advise urgent evaluation beyond four hours [3] [2]. Patient education materials also flag systemic reactions in rare cases (fainting, dizziness, low blood pressure) with vasoactive agents, though those systemic effects appear less emphasized in large clinical series [7] [8].

2. Injection‑site harms — pain, bleeding, bruising and hematoma

Most programs report mild but common local effects: pain or aching at the injection site, minor bleeding and bruising; one cohort found small hematomas in roughly one‑fifth of patients (20.9%) and routine advice is to apply pressure for five minutes after injection to limit bleeding [9] [4]. Clinics use very short fine needles and counsel patients that discomfort is usually tolerable, but pain can contribute to discontinuation [3] [6].

3. Fibrosis, nodules and penile curvature as chronic complications

Multiple studies document that repeated injections over months to years can produce fibrotic palpable nodules or plaques and occasionally penile curvature. Fibrotic complication rates rise with duration and frequency of injections; one older series reported a fibrotic complication rate of about 31% at 12 months, and other long‑term reports show fibrotic indurations in a few percent of patients [4] [5]. Training on correct injection technique is repeatedly emphasized to limit scarring and curvature [10] [11].

4. Long‑term adherence and why many stop

Longitudinal studies show substantial dropout despite efficacy: attrition rates of roughly 30% over a few years are reported, and many stop because of cost, discomfort with self‑injection, lack of spontaneity and partner issues rather than major adverse events [12] [6] [5]. Comparative series indicate many who discontinue remain sexually active using other therapies such as implants, vacuum devices or oral meds [13].

5. Severe complications tied to non‑medical injections or augmentations

When non‑medical substances (mineral oil, unapproved fillers) are injected for cosmetic augmentation, outcomes are far worse: large series of self‑injection complications found high rates of pain, swelling, ulceration and, in many cases, need for radical excision or grafting (penile necrosis, lymphoedema) — a distinct and more dangerous problem than medically supervised intracavernosal therapy [14] [15]. Clinical guidance and studies distinguish medically prescribed vasoactive agents from dangerous foreign‑material self‑injections [14] [15].

6. How clinicians try to reduce risk — training, titration and monitoring

Urology programs insist on in‑office demonstration, initial dosing and follow‑up titration to balance effectiveness and priapism risk; routine monitoring and patient education (when to seek urgent care) are central recommendations [10] [11] [3]. Some centers also advise limits on injection frequency (e.g., no more than two to three times per week) to lower fibrosis risk [16] [3].

7. Gaps and competing perspectives in available reporting

Sources agree on the main acute and chronic risks but differ in emphasis: patient‑facing guides stress low incidence of severe events when therapy is supervised [10] [6], while surgical and long‑term cohorts highlight nontrivial fibrosis rates and dropout [4] [5]. Available sources do not mention modern randomized trials directly comparing long‑term penile tissue outcomes between different injectable regimens; they also do not provide a contemporary pooled incidence for priapism across all centers — reported rates vary by series [4] [5] [2].

8. Practical takeaways for patients and clinicians

If considering injections, get in‑office instruction, start at low dose, learn emergency steps for priapism and expect possible local pain and bruising; accept that some men eventually stop injections for non‑safety reasons (cost, spontaneity, partner preferences) and that long‑term follow‑up is essential to monitor fibrosis [10] [4] [12]. Avoid non‑medical fillers or self‑administered foreign materials — those carry substantial risk of necrosis and surgical morbidity [14] [15].

Limitations: this summary draws only on the provided patient guides, clinical cohorts and reviews; incidence estimates vary across studies and some modern pooled data are not present in the supplied sources (not found in current reporting).

Want to dive deeper?
How effective is penile injection therapy compared with oral ED medications long-term?
What are the common side effects and how are penile injection complications managed?
Which patients are poor candidates for penile injections and what alternatives exist?
What are the risks of priapism with penile injections and how is it treated emergently?
How do injection agents (alprostadil, papaverine, phentolamine) differ in safety and outcomes?