Literature DB >> 20350760

False penile fracture: value of different diagnostic approaches and long-term outcome of conservative and surgical management.

Ahmed El-Assmy1, Hossam S El-Tholoth, Mohamed E Abou-El-Ghar, Tarek Mohsen, El Housseiny I Ibrahiem.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We determined the value of clinical and radiological findings in diagnosis of false penile fracture. Also, the long-term outcome of conservative and surgical treatment of such patients was evaluated.
METHODS: Seventeen patients with false penile fracture were treated conservatively (3 patients) and surgically (14 patients) at our center. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for etiology, symptoms, signs of physical examination, and information on findings of surgical exploration. Data on erectile function and penile sequelae were obtained during follow-up using the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) questionnaire and local examination.
RESULTS: The most common cause of false penile fracture is sexual intercourse (76.5%). False fracture was suspected in 3 patients who presented with small hematoma and slow post-trauma detumescence; intact tunicas were diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in all of them and were managed conservatively. Surgical penile exploration was performed in 14 cases, in whom preoperative ultrasound was done in 6, and it was false positive for presence of tunical tear in 50%. Exploration revealed nonspecific dartos bleeding in 9 cases and avulsed superficial dorsal vein in 5. Long-term follow-up (mean=93 months) was available for 16 patients, among whom there was no complications.
CONCLUSIONS: In most cases, false penile fracture is indistinguishable from true penile fracture either clinically or radiologically. In atypical cases, MRI seems to be a promising modality for diagnosis of such patients. The long-term outcome of conservative and surgical treatment is excellent. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20350760     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.11.086

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  8 in total

1.  Isolated rupture of the superficial vein of the penis.

Authors:  Alper Eken; Meltem Acil; Taner Arpaci
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Superficial dorsal vein injury/thrombosis presenting as false penile fracture requiring dorsal venous ligation.

Authors:  Arash Rafiei; Tariq S Hakky; Daniel Martinez; Justin Parker; Rafael Carrion
Journal:  Sex Med       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 2.491

Review 3.  Penile fracture epidemiology, diagnosis and management in Iran: a narrative review.

Authors:  Majid Mirzazadeh; Morteza Fallahkarkan; Jalil Hosseini
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-04

4.  Suspected penile fracture: to operate or not to operate?

Authors:  Ian S Metzler; Amanda B Reed-Maldonado; Tom F Lue
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-10

5.  Destructive domino: Subcutaneous self-implanted penile foreign body implicated in rule-out penile fracture.

Authors:  Jason Elyaguov; Gerald Matthews; John Phillips
Journal:  Urol Case Rep       Date:  2020-05-20

6.  Isolated rupture of the superficial dorsal vein of the penis during intercourse: A rare cause of false penile fracture.

Authors:  Mohammed Ettaouil; Chouaib Waffar; Hamza Moudlige; Mohamed Dakir; Adil Debbagh; Rachid Aboutaieb
Journal:  Urol Case Rep       Date:  2021-06-25

7.  Increase in fracture of the penis in south-west Nigeria.

Authors:  Kehinde H Tijani; Chidiebere N Ogo; Rufus W Ojewola; Nurudeen O Akanmu
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2012-08-15

8.  False fracture of the penis: Different pathology but similar clinical presentation and management.

Authors:  Adel Kurkar; Ahmad A Elderwy; Hazem Orabi
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2014-01
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.