Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30544206›Full record

ArticleAesthetic surgery journal2019

The Surgical Treatment of Adult Acquired Buried Penis Syndrome: A New Classification System.

Madison A Hesse, Jacqueline S Israel, Nikita O Shulzhenko, Ruston J Sanchez, Catharine B Garland, John W Siebert, Michael L Bentz, Daniel H Williams, Samuel O Poore

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Madison A HesseDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Jacqueline S IsraelDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Nikita O ShulzhenkoDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Ruston J SanchezDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Catharine B GarlandDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
John W SiebertDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Michael L BentzDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Daniel H WilliamsDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Samuel O PooreDepartments of Surgery (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery) and Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdult acquired buried penis syndrome may be associated with an inability to void, sexual dysfunction, and recurrent infection. Previously published classification systems rely on intraoperative findings, such as penile skin quality.

objectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes after adult acquired buried penis repair and to develop a classification system based on preoperative assessment.

methodsThe authors reviewed data from patients who underwent buried penis reconstruction at a single institution. Patient history and physical examination guided the development of a classification system for surgical planning.

resultsOf the 27 patients included, the mean age was 56 ± 15 years and mean body mass index was 49 ± 14 kg/m2. Patients were classified into 4 groups based on examination findings: (I) buried penis due to skin deficiency, iatrogenic scarring, and/or diseased penile skin (n = 3); (II) excess abdominal skin and fat (n = 6); (III) excess skin and fat with diseased penile skin (n = 16); and (IV) type III plus severe scrotal edema (n = 2). Surgical treatment (eg, excision and grafting, mons suspension, panniculectomy, translocation of testes, and/or scrotectomy) was tailored based on classification. Complications included wound breakdown (n = 3), cellulitis (n = 4), and hematoma (n = 1). Nearly all patients (96%) reported early satisfaction and improvement in their symptoms postoperatively.

conclusionsClassifying patients with buried penis according to preoperative examination findings may guide surgical decision-making and preoperative counseling and allow for optimized aesthetics to enhance self-esteem and sexual well-being. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:

Indexed as

AbdominoplastyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBody Mass IndexClinical Decision-MakingHumansMaleMiddle AgedPenile DiseasesPenisPlastic Surgery ProceduresPreoperative PeriodScrotumSkin TransplantationSyndrome

Identifiers

PMID30544206
OpenAlexW2904248037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.