INTRODUCTION: Penile duplication is a rare anomaly with an incidence of 1 in 5,500,000. It is normally associated with other malformations, such as double bladder, presence of the cloaca, imperforate anus, duplication of the rectosigmoid and vertebral deformities. Presented here is the surgical technique used to resolve a rare case of complete penile duplication in a 5-year-old child, without any other malformation. PATIENT AND METHODS: A male Caucasian patient presented with a rare diagnosis of complete penile duplication, without any associated systemic malformation. At 5 years of age, he was successfully submitted to surgical treatment. The procedure included the following steps: penile dissection up to the point of ischial-pubic insertion; dissection of the hypoplastic urethra; amputation of the less developed penis; termino-lateral urethral anastomosis and phalloplasty. RESULTS: Three years after surgery, penile morphology was normal, with a normal urinary flow according to age. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment should always be individualized. The malformations that are potentially life-threatening should be solved first. Fortunately, this patient had only penile duplication, successfully corrected after surgical treatment. Copyright (c) 2010 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION: Penile duplication is a rare anomaly with an incidence of 1 in 5,500,000. It is normally associated with other malformations, such as double bladder, presence of the cloaca, imperforate anus, duplication of the rectosigmoid and vertebral deformities. Presented here is the surgical technique used to resolve a rare case of complete penile duplication in a 5-year-old child, without any other malformation. PATIENT AND METHODS: A male Caucasian patient presented with a rare diagnosis of complete penile duplication, without any associated systemic malformation. At 5 years of age, he was successfully submitted to surgical treatment. The procedure included the following steps: penile dissection up to the point of ischial-pubic insertion; dissection of the hypoplastic urethra; amputation of the less developed penis; termino-lateral urethral anastomosis and phalloplasty. RESULTS: Three years after surgery, penile morphology was normal, with a normal urinary flow according to age. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment should always be individualized. The malformations that are potentially life-threatening should be solved first. Fortunately, this patient had only penile duplication, successfully corrected after surgical treatment. Copyright (c) 2010 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors: Dhairya A Lakhani; Mary Cannon; Aneri B Balar; Gabriela V Hernandez; Sanjeev Katyal; Osama Al-Omar; Eyassu Hailemichael Journal: Radiol Case Rep Date: 2021-01-25