ArticleMedicine2020
Pseudodiphallia: a rare kind of diphallia: A case report and literature review.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perineal pseudophallus unmasked: a rare case report of lipomatous hamartoma mimicking an accessory penis in an infant.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- Case Report: Penile hamartoma with penile torsion in a child: etiology-targeted one-stage surgical correction and literature review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Triphallia: the first cadaveric description of internal penile triplication: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2024Article
- Diphallia: literature review and proposed surgical classification system.ANZ journal of surgery · 2022Review
- Bilateral ureteral reimplantation in a patient with an intraperitoneal ectopic bipenis: A case report.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
- Hypospadias associated with partial bifid phallus: A case report.Urology case reports · 2021Article
- Pseudodiphallia Associated With Anorectal Malformations and Hamartoma: A Case Report.Pediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric SocietyArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationalePseudodiphallia, as a rare kind of diphallia, which is characterized by a small accessory penile-like tissue without a normal penile anatomy structure. Only a few cases have been reported. Here, we report a case of pseudodiphallia with phimosis and bilateral extrarenal pelvis. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 23-year-old male visited our hospital with a complaint of external genitalia malformation. Physical examination revealed a normal-sized penis with phimosis, and an extra half glans horizontally attached to the right side of the normal glans penis is visible after completely retracting the foreskin. The CT urography showed a bilateral extrarenal pelvis, and no other abnormalities were found in the kidneys, ureter, bladder, and vertebral bodies. DIAGNOSIS: Based on the physical examination and the CT urography results, the 23-year-old male was diagnosed with Pseudodiphallia.
interventionExcessive penile tissue was resected, and a foreskin circumcision operation was performed under general anesthesia. OUTCOMES: The patient recovered smoothly without complications (no infection, hematoma, or wound dehiscence) after surgery. At 6 months follow-up, the patient was content with the external genitalia's appearance, and the urination and erectile function were normal. LESSONS: Pseudodiphallia is a rare kind of diphallia, and this is the first report on pseudodiphallia with a bilateral extrarenal pelvis. CT urography can be used to assess the associated internal anomalies before surgery.
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.