ArticleMedicine2020
Circumferential penile defect reconstruction with pull-up double-opposing keystone-designed perforator island flaps: A case report.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Novel Single-stage Technique for Ventral Penile and Urethral Reconstruction Using a Deep External Pudendal Artery Propeller Flap.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Two laterally based scrotal pedicled flap grafts in the treatment of penile skin necrosis due to ring incarceration: a case series.Sexual medicine · 2024Article
- One-stage Reconstruction of Penile Paraffinoma Using Spiral Stitches FTSG and Evaluation of Sexual Function.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleThe challenges with reconstruction of penile defects are plenty. In addition, no single and universally accepted reconstructive method exists for penile defect repair. Herein, we present the application of a circumferential penile shaft defect reconstruction using pull-up double-opposing keystone-designed perforator island flaps (KDPIFs) in one patient. This is the first case report of a circumferential penile shaft defect reconstruction using KDPIFs. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 43-year-old man who injected petroleum jelly into his penis 10 years ago presented with multiple firm nodular mass-like lesions adherent to the overlying skin along the penile shaft. Our urologic surgeon removed the foreign bodies and performed a primary closure with undermining. However, wound dehiscence developed, and skin necrosis was exacerbated 5 days postoperatively. DIAGNOSES: We performed debridement, and the final post-debridement defect was circumferential (5.5 × 12 cm) from the base of the glans to the midpoint of the penile shaft.
interventionsWe covered the defect using pull-up double-opposing KDPIFs (10 × 13 cm each) based on the hot spots of the superficial external pudendal artery perforators on each side from the suprapubic area to the scrotum. OUTCOMES: The flaps survived perfectly, with no postoperative complications. The patient was satisfied with the final outcome and had no erectile dysfunction or shortening of penile length after a 6-month follow-up. LESSONS: We successfully reconstructed a circumferential penile defect with pull-up double-opposing KDPIFs both esthetically and functionally. Our technique can be a good alternative modality for extensive penile defect reconstruction.
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.