INTRODUCTION: Most men seeking penile enhancement techniques have a normal penile size. They are either misinformed or suffer from penile dysmorphophobia and should be discouraged from undergoing invasive procedures. Less invasive techniques including penile extenders are not associated with major complications and may be beneficial from a psychological perspective. AIM: We conducted this study to assess the efficacy and safety of AndroPenis (Andromedical, Madrid, Spain) penile extender. METHODS: Between December 2010 and December 2013, 163 men presented to our institution complaining of small penile length and/or girth. All patients received structured psychosexual counseling. Fifty-four patients were willing to use the AndroPenis penile extender after counseling. Patients with major psychiatric disorders were excluded from enrollment. The patients were instructed to wear the device between 4 and 6 hours per day for 6 months. Penile dimensions including flaccid stretched and erected lengths were measured at baseline and after 1, 3, 6, and 9 months. Erectile function was assessed at baseline and 9 months after treatment using the simplified International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5). An institutional nonstandardized questionnaire was used to evaluate patient satisfaction at the end of study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Penile length and girth enhancement as well as satisfaction rate and improvement in erectile function were assessed during follow-up. RESULTS: At 6-month follow-up, a mean gain of 1.7 ± 0.8, 1.3 ± 0.4, and 1.2 ± 0.4 cm was noted for the flaccid, stretched, and erected penile lengths, respectively (all P values < 0.001). During the off treatment period, there were no significant changes in penile lengths. No effect on penile girth was observed. Patient satisfaction survey revealed modest satisfaction. From 13 patients with mild baseline erectile dysfunction, nine patients reported normal erectile function after 9 months. CONCLUSION: Penile extender as a minimally invasive technique is safe and provides modest benefits and patient satisfaction.
INTRODUCTION: Most men seeking penile enhancement techniques have a normal penile size. They are either misinformed or suffer from penile dysmorphophobia and should be discouraged from undergoing invasive procedures. Less invasive techniques including penile extenders are not associated with major complications and may be beneficial from a psychological perspective. AIM: We conducted this study to assess the efficacy and safety of AndroPenis (Andromedical, Madrid, Spain) penile extender. METHODS: Between December 2010 and December 2013, 163 men presented to our institution complaining of small penile length and/or girth. All patients received structured psychosexual counseling. Fifty-four patients were willing to use the AndroPenis penile extender after counseling. Patients with major psychiatric disorders were excluded from enrollment. The patients were instructed to wear the device between 4 and 6 hours per day for 6 months. Penile dimensions including flaccid stretched and erected lengths were measured at baseline and after 1, 3, 6, and 9 months. Erectile function was assessed at baseline and 9 months after treatment using the simplified International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5). An institutional nonstandardized questionnaire was used to evaluate patient satisfaction at the end of study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Penile length and girth enhancement as well as satisfaction rate and improvement in erectile function were assessed during follow-up. RESULTS: At 6-month follow-up, a mean gain of 1.7 ± 0.8, 1.3 ± 0.4, and 1.2 ± 0.4 cm was noted for the flaccid, stretched, and erected penile lengths, respectively (all P values < 0.001). During the off treatment period, there were no significant changes in penile lengths. No effect on penile girth was observed. Patient satisfaction survey revealed modest satisfaction. From 13 patients with mild baseline erectile dysfunction, nine patients reported normal erectile function after 9 months. CONCLUSION: Penile extender as a minimally invasive technique is safe and provides modest benefits and patient satisfaction.
Authors: Carlo Bettocchi; Andrea Alberto Checchia; Ugo Giovanni Falagario; Anna Ricapito; Gian Maria Busetto; Luigi Cormio; Giuseppe Carrieri Journal: Int J Impot Res Date: 2022-04-05 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: Christopher D Gaffney; Matthew J Pagano; Aaron C Weinberg; Alex C Small; Franklin E Kuehas; Paulo H Egydio; Robert J Valenzuela Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2016-06