ReviewNature reviews. Urology2012
Therapeutic strategies for patients with micropenis or penile dysmorphic disorder.
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- "Not enough" vs. "never perfect": a qualitative analysis of penile enlargement surgery intentions in heterosexual and homosexual men.Sexual medicine · 2026Article
- Morphometric Predictors of Penile Length Increase After Division of its Suspensory Ligament.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Article
- Tissue Engineering for Penile Reconstruction.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- HCG supplement did not accelerate tunica albuginea remodeling to facilitate penile growth.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Reproductive Phenotypes in Men With Acquired or Congenital Hypogonadotropic Hypogonadism: A Comparative Study.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2022Article
- Indications and characteristics of penile traction and vacuum erection devices.Nature reviews. Urology · 2022Review
- Why look back in anger? Masculinizing surgery in patients with DSD.Nature reviews. Urology · 2021Article
- Towards clinical application of tissue engineering for erectile penile regeneration.Nature reviews. Urology · 2019Review
- Timing of androgen receptor disruption and estrogen exposure underlies a spectrum of congenital penile anomalies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015Article
- The inconspicuous penis in children.Nature reviews. Urology · 2015Review
- Anti-lysyl oxidase combined with a vacuum device induces penile lengthening by remodeling the tunica albuginea.Asian journal of andrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Micropenis in adults is defined as a stretched length of <7.5 cm. Many aetiologies exist, including congenital and endocrinological causes as well as pathological conditions, such as penile lichen sclerosus, trauma and genital cancer. The resulting reduction in functional penile length can lead to considerable psychosexual morbidity. Furthermore, the subset of patients with micropenis who also suffer from penile dysmorphic disorder require careful and intensive psychological counselling. Corrective surgery for micropenis can be performed in patients with realistic expectations. Total phalloplasty using radial-artery-based forearm skin flaps can offer restoration of normal penile length in selected patients. More-conservative surgical techniques to improve length or girth are limited by minimal enhancement but associated with a significantly lower rate of complications and comorbidity compared to total phalloplasty. Emerging tissue engineering techniques might represent a suitable alternative to penile replacement surgery in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.