| Literature DB >> 34818603 |
Edoardo Stefano Pescatori1, Barbara Drei2, Salvatore Rabito3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Over the years, scattered cases of acquired penile girth increase have been published with different terms, the common clinical feature being a mechanically hampered penetration. AIM: To search for all published cases of acquired penile girth increase, and to propose a geometrically-based reduction corporoplasty.Entities:
Keywords: Circumference; DICC; Dimensions; Dyspareunia; Erection; Girth; Macropenis; Megalophallus; Megapenis; Penis
Year: 2021 PMID: 34818603 PMCID: PMC8847819 DOI: 10.1016/j.esxm.2021.100460
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sex Med ISSN: 2050-1161 Impact factor: 2.491
Figure 1Erect penis at presentation.
Figures 2A, B: (A) dynamic cavernosograpy during DICC; (B) dynamic MRI image.
Figures 3A–E: key surgical steps in our case. (A) degloved, extruded penis under hydraulic erection: arrow shows the point of transition from normal to thinned albuginea; (B) marking reference points for subsequent circumferential measurements; (C) albuginea ellipse geometrically defined; (D) separation of cavernosal tissue from thin albuginea that will be excised; (E) bovine pericardium patch sutured to the right paraurethral albuginea.
Figure 4scheme of calculation for geometrically-based definition of albuginea ellipses to be excised. 0–7 = reference points where circumferential measurements are acquired; L1-6 = segments resulting as differences between measured circumferences and target reference sections; Ct’ = target circumference at reference section 0; Ct” = target circumference at reference section 7.
Key clinical characteristics of all published cases, and of our case, of penile girth increase.
| Year (ref.) | Age | Main complaint | Etiology | Time for develop-ment | Maximal erect girth (cm) | Penile affected area | Deformity present in: | Associated findings | Potency | Intraop. finding | Pathol. | Surgery | FU |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1977 (4) | 30 | partner dyspareun. | SCD and priapism | 7 y | 18 | whole shaft | erection and flaccidity | - | Yes (history) | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. only lubricant | n.r. |
| 1995 (1) | 63 | penile mass | - | months | - | proximal third | erection | - | Yes (history, doppler, DICC) | thin tunica | unrem. | Nesbit-like | 6 mo |
| 2000 (5) | 38 | n.r. | SCD and priapism | n.r. | 19,5 | proximal two thirds | erection and flaccidity | hypoxic corpora at MRI | Yes (history) | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.r. |
| 2002 (6) | 35 | penetration impaired | SCD and priapism | 2 y | n.r. | n.r. | n.r. | - | Yes (history) | n.r. | n.r. | Corporoplasty | n.r. |
| 2004 (8 ab) | 33 | new penis size judged nonfunctio-nal | SCD and priapism+ Winter shunt | n.r. | 21 | whole shaft | erection and flaccidity | fibrotic corpora | No (history + intracav. injection of papaver.) | fibrotic tissue | n.r. | Nesbit-like + penile prosth. + tunica graft | n.r. |
| 2015 (7) | 17 | penetration impossible | SCD and priapism | 5 y | 25 | distal two thirds | erection and flaccidity | - | Yes (history) | - | - | Nesbit-like | postop visits |
| 2016 (2 ab) | 60 | penetration impossible, partner dyspareun. | - | “progres-sive” | 16 | proximal third | Erection | fibrotic change at mid-shaft | Yes (history) | thin tunica | thin tunica | Nesbit-like | 6 mo |
| 2019 Our case | 55 | penetration impaired, partner dyspareun. | - | 2 y | 21 | mid two thirds | erection | - | Yes (history, DICC) | thin tunica | unrem. | Geom. Nesbit-like + patch | 19 mo ongoing |
ab = Conference abstract; DICC = Dynamic Infusion Cavernosometry Cavernosography; dyspareun. = dyspareunia; FU = follow-up; Geom = geometrically; intracav. = intracavernosal; MRI = Magnetic Resonance Imaging; n.a. = not applicable; n.r. = not reported; papaver. = papaverine; Pathol. = Pathology report; prosth. = prosthesis; (ref.) = reference number at bibliography; SCD = sickle cell disease; unrem. = unremarkable.
Figure 5Final result at 12 months follow-up.