International journal of surgery case reports · 2024
When a non-inflatable implant breaks the penis: A case report of penile fracture due to an unusual penile implant.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Azmi Yufi Aulia, Renaldo Johan, Budiyanto Tri, Putri Karinda Triharyu Caesari, Mardihusodo Hajid Rahmadianto
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Penile fracture is a relatively uncommon condition that most commonly results from blunt trauma during sexual intercourse, forced flexion, masturbation, or rolling over. However, other causes are also possible. It is a catastrophic illness to the patient's organic and psychological health.
CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case of a 43-year-old male patient who sustained a penile fracture due to the presence of a toothbrush implant. No urethral injury was documented. The patient underwent surgical repair, and one month post-surgery, exhibited no deformity and had a normal sexual and voiding function.
CLINICAL DISCUSSION: Penile fracture is most commonly caused by blunt trauma during sexual intercourse. While it has not been documented in the literature, penile implants may increase the incidence of penile fractures. Clinical examination and urethrography confirmed the absence of urethral injury. In cases where a penile fracture is suspected, the only management is surgical exploration. This approach has resulted in the lowest rate of negative long-term sequelae and does not negatively impact the patient's psychological well-being.
CONCLUSION: Penile fracture is a rare but serious condition that can result from the presence of an unstandardized implant. It is not close to the incidence of penile fracture for unstandardized prosthesis as even the standardized implant can get fracture when counter to high velocity. To avoid functional and morphological abnormalities, surgical exploration is recommended as the primary course of treatment.
CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case of a 43-year-old male patient who sustained a penile fracture due to the presence of a toothbrush implant. No urethral injury was documented. The patient underwent surgical repair, and one month post-surgery, exhibited no deformity and had a normal sexual and voiding function.
CLINICAL DISCUSSION: Penile fracture is most commonly caused by blunt trauma during sexual intercourse. While it has not been documented in the literature, penile implants may increase the incidence of penile fractures. Clinical examination and urethrography confirmed the absence of urethral injury. In cases where a penile fracture is suspected, the only management is surgical exploration. This approach has resulted in the lowest rate of negative long-term sequelae and does not negatively impact the patient's psychological well-being.
CONCLUSION: Penile fracture is a rare but serious condition that can result from the presence of an unstandardized implant. It is not close to the incidence of penile fracture for unstandardized prosthesis as even the standardized implant can get fracture when counter to high velocity. To avoid functional and morphological abnormalities, surgical exploration is recommended as the primary course of treatment.