| Literature DB >> 26558077 |
Alaa A Tealab1, Aref M Maarouf2, Mohamed Habous3, David J Ralph4, Safwat Abohashem2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the use of an acellular collagen matrix (Pelvicol, Bard Medical, Covington, GA, USA), a successful agent for reconstructive surgery, for enhancing penile girth. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between June and December 2011, 18 patients (mean age 24 years, range 19-38) had their penis augmented with Pelvicol; the mean (range) penile circumference was 9.2 (7-13) cm before treatment. They were divided into two groups; the first (10 patients) had a Pelvicol sheet of 8 × 12 cm inserted through a V-Y suprapubic incision and wrapped around the shaft in a bilayer under the dartos fascia, but not covering the urethra, with division of the suspensory ligament. The second group of eight patients had the Pelvicol inserted through a subcoronal degloving incision and placed in one layer. The penile circumference was measured at 6 and 12 months after surgery. Patient satisfaction at 1 year after surgery was assessed as 'poor', 'unsatisfied', 'moderately satisfied', 'highly satisfied', or 'excellent'.Entities:
Keywords: Collagen matrix; Dysmorphophobia; Penile augmentation
Year: 2013 PMID: 26558077 PMCID: PMC4442917 DOI: 10.1016/j.aju.2013.02.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arab J Urol ISSN: 2090-598X
Patients satisfaction score.
| Score | Rate |
|---|---|
| 1 | Poor result |
| 2 | Unsatisfied |
| 3 | Moderately satisfied |
| 4 | Highly satisfied |
| 5 | Excellent satisfied |
Early complications in both groups.
| Complications | Group 1 | Group 2 |
|---|---|---|
| No complications | 5 | 5 |
| Complications managed conservatively | 3 | 1 |
| Complications mandate pelvicol removal | 2 | 2 |
∗p Value = 0.675.
Figure 1A, B. Surgical wound infection with a subcutaneous purulent collection and infection of the graft; this patient required immediate surgical exploration and removal of the infected graft.
Figure 2Superficial wound dehiscence at the level of the subcoronal incision; this patient was managed conservatively with broad-spectrum antibiotics.
Patients satisfaction in both groups.
| Patient satisfaction | Group 1 | Group 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Highly satisfied | 2 (20%) | – |
| Moderately satisfied | 4 (40%) | 3 (37.5%) |
| Unsatisfied | 4 (40%) | 5 (62.5%) |
∗p Value = 0.358.