Literature DB >> 30840543

The Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Penile Fracture in Real-Life Emergency Settings: Comparative Analysis with Intraoperative Findings.

Ioannis Sokolakis1, Tina Schubert1, Markus Oelschlaeger1, Markus Krebs1, Jürgen E Gschwend2, Konstantin Holzapfel3, Hubert Kübler1, Georgios Gakis1, Georgios Hatzichristodoulou1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We evaluated the role of magnetic resonance imaging of the penis in the diagnosis of penile fracture and/or concomitant urethral lesions in real-life emergency settings compared with intraoperative findings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 43 patients presented with suspicion of penile fracture between January 2006 and December 2016. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed in 28 patients prior to surgical treatment in the emergency setting. Surgery was done in all patients via a subcoronal, circumferential degloving approach. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values as well as likelihood ratios of the positive and negative results of the agreement between magnetic resonance imaging and intraoperative findings.
RESULTS: Intraoperatively penile fracture was confirmed in 19 of 28 patients (67.9%) and a concomitant urethral lesion was observed in 5 of 28 (17.9%). Magnetic resonance imaging findings were highly associated with intraoperative findings of tunical rupture, including 100% sensitivity (95% CI 98.5-100), 77.8% specificity (95% CI 50.6-100), 90.5% positive predictive value (95% CI 78-100), 100% negative predictive value (95% CI 97.6-100) and a positive result likelihood ratio of 4.5. Magnetic resonance imaging had lower accuracy for urethral lesions with 60% sensitivity (95% CI 17.1-100), 78.3% specificity (95% CI 61.5-95.1), 37.5% positive predictive value (95% CI 4-71), 90% negative predictive value (95% CI 76.9-100) and a positive result likelihood ratio of 2.76.
CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging may be applicable in the emergency setting if the goal is to treat all men who warrant intervention. It has high sensitivity and negative predictive value for tunical rupture and concomitant urethral lesions. Therefore, it could help avoid unnecessary surgery by excluding the diagnosis. However, solitary magnetic resonance imaging is not sufficient for diagnosis and it should not replace clinical assessment or delay surgical exploration.

Entities:  

Keywords:  crush syndrome; emergency medicine; magnetic resonance imaging; penis; urethra

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30840543     DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000211

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  5 in total

1.  The value of pre-operative MRI in management of penile fractures.

Authors:  Sankara Varun Bhoopathy; Lawrence H Kim
Journal:  Urol Case Rep       Date:  2020-04-06

2.  The pelvic pop: an extremely rare case of internal penile fracture presenting with scrotal hematoma and review of the literature.

Authors:  Michael E Rezaee; Martin S Gross
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2021 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.285

3.  Diagnostic performance of MRI and US in suspicion of penile fracture.

Authors:  Paul Spiesecke; Josef Mang; Thomas Fischer; Bernd Hamm; Markus H Lerchbaumer
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2022-03

4.  Risk factors for penile fracture compared with a surgical control cohort in the United States: the role of substance abuse.

Authors:  Nathaniel Christian-Miller; Andrew T Lenis; Katherine E Fero; Josef Madrigral; Sriram V Eleswarapu; Karim Chamie; Peyman Benharash
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2021 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.285

5.  Findings regarding non-sexual penile fracture in a referral emergency hospital.

Authors:  Rodrigo Barros; Alex Schul; Andre G Cavalcanti; Luciano Alves Favorito; Leandro Koifman
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.541

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.