DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2019.0367
Lessons learned after 20 years' experience with penile fracture.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
To report our experience over the past 20 years in the diagnosis and surgical treatment of penile fracture (PF).
MATERIALS AND
METHODS
Between January 1997 and January 2017, patients with clinical diagnosis of PF were admitted to our facility and retrospectively assessed. Medical records were reviewed for clinical presentation, etiology and operative findings. Postoperative complications, sexual and urinary function were evaluated.
RESULTS
Sexual trauma was the main etiological factor, responsible for 255 cases (88.5%): 110 (43.1%) occurred with the "doggy style" position, 103 (40.3%) with "man on top" position, 31 (12.1%) with the "woman on top" position and 11 (4.3%) in other sexual positions. The most common findings in the clinical presentation were hematoma, in all cases and detumescence in 238 (82.6%). Unilateral corpus cavernosum injuries were found in 199 (69%) patients and bilateral in 89 (31%) patients. Urethral injuries were observed in 54 (18.7%) cases. Nine (14.7%) patients developed erectile dysfunction and eight (13.1%) had penile curvature. Only two (3.7%) patients had complications after urethral reconstruction.
CONCLUSIONS
PF has typical clinical presentation and no need for additional tests in most cases. Hematoma and immediate penile detumescence are the most common clinical findings. Sexual activity was the most common cause. The 'doggy style' and 'man-on-top' was the most common positions and generally associated with more severe lesions. Concomitant urethral injury should be considered in cases of high-energy trauma. Surgical reconstruction produces satisfactory results, however, it can lead to complications, such as erectile dysfunction and penile curvature.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.