Urology · 2025
Comparison of Three Surgical Techniques for Concealed Penis in Children.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Deng Qi-Fei, Chu Han, Cao Yongsheng, Li Guangyuan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of three surgical approaches for correcting severe concealed penis in pediatric patients.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 150 consecutive cases treated at our hospital from January 2020 through January 2023. Participants were stratified into three intervention groups: Group A (pedicled island flap transfer, n = 50), Group B (modified Shiraki penile skin inlay, n = 50), and Group C (scrotal skin advancement technique, n = 50). Comparative parameters included operative duration, postoperative complications (scarring, infection, edema, and retraction), and penile shaft exposure measurements at 6-month follow-up.
RESULTS: All procedures were completed without intraoperative neurovascular bundle injury or urethral complications. No cases exhibited persistent postoperative preputial edema or dysphoric erection. Demographic characteristics, including mean age (4.2 ± 1.3 years), body mass index percentile (78.4 ± 12.6), and preoperative infection rates, showed no intergroup differences (P >.05). Significant variances emerged in operative duration (Group A: 98 ± 15 minutes vs Group C: 82 ± 12 minutes, P = .017), postoperative penile length gain (Group A: 2.8 ± 0.6 cm vs Group B: 2.1 ± 0.5 cm, P <.01), retraction rates (Group B: 14% vs Group A: 2%, P = .03), and persistent edema incidence (Group B: 18% vs Group A: 4%, P = .008).
CONCLUSION: While all three techniques effectively addressed severe concealed penis deformity, pedicled island flap reconstruction (Group A) and scrotal advancement plasty (Group C) demonstrated superior long-term outcomes in tissue viability and complication profiles. These approaches achieved significantly better phallic length preservation and lower reoperation rates compared to the modified Shiraki technique.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 150 consecutive cases treated at our hospital from January 2020 through January 2023. Participants were stratified into three intervention groups: Group A (pedicled island flap transfer, n = 50), Group B (modified Shiraki penile skin inlay, n = 50), and Group C (scrotal skin advancement technique, n = 50). Comparative parameters included operative duration, postoperative complications (scarring, infection, edema, and retraction), and penile shaft exposure measurements at 6-month follow-up.
RESULTS: All procedures were completed without intraoperative neurovascular bundle injury or urethral complications. No cases exhibited persistent postoperative preputial edema or dysphoric erection. Demographic characteristics, including mean age (4.2 ± 1.3 years), body mass index percentile (78.4 ± 12.6), and preoperative infection rates, showed no intergroup differences (P >.05). Significant variances emerged in operative duration (Group A: 98 ± 15 minutes vs Group C: 82 ± 12 minutes, P = .017), postoperative penile length gain (Group A: 2.8 ± 0.6 cm vs Group B: 2.1 ± 0.5 cm, P <.01), retraction rates (Group B: 14% vs Group A: 2%, P = .03), and persistent edema incidence (Group B: 18% vs Group A: 4%, P = .008).
CONCLUSION: While all three techniques effectively addressed severe concealed penis deformity, pedicled island flap reconstruction (Group A) and scrotal advancement plasty (Group C) demonstrated superior long-term outcomes in tissue viability and complication profiles. These approaches achieved significantly better phallic length preservation and lower reoperation rates compared to the modified Shiraki technique.