ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2021
Living with someone else's penis: The lived experiences of two South African penile allograft recipients: A descriptive phenomenological study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conventional Penile Reconstruction Versus Penile Allotransplantation: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Experimental Models in Penile Transplantation: Translational Insights and Relevance to Clinical Application.Cureus · 2024Review
- Penile Microdissection: A Live Donor Feasibility Study in Feminizing Gender-Affirming Surgery.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ethical considerations regarding penis transplantation surgery in transgender men-an empirical ethics study.Sexual medicine · 2023Review
- Lessons learned from the first 15 years of penile transplantation and updates to the Baltimore Criteria.Nature reviews. Urology · 2023Review
- Importance of Breast Sensation After Mastectomy: Evidence from Three Sources.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn South Africa, penile loss is a recognised complication of ritual circumcision which has a profoundly negative effect on these men's psyches and their everyday lives. The purpose of this paper was to investigate the experiences of the first two South African penile allograft transplantation recipients in order to assess the psychosocial impact of this surgery. MATERIALS AND
methodsA qualitative descriptive phenomenology approach was used. A total of four in-depth interviews were conducted with the two South African penile transplant recipients. The interviews were transcribed verbatim while adding the field and observational notes. Thematic analysis was used to derive meaning from the collected data.
resultsAfter the penile loss, both participants reported feeling suicidal for the following reasons: their communities shunned them and regarded them as 'dead,' they felt severely ashamed of their disfigured bodies, they were unable to develop intimate relationships and could not have children. Transplantation gave them a fully functional penis, which resolved the majority of these issues. The participants were able to build relationships and satisfy their own and their partners' sexual and relationship needs. The transplant led to complete restoration of their self-image and manhood. They were, however, still persecuted by their traditional communities as they had not successfully completed the ritual circumcision ceremony.
conclusionThis study emphasises the necessity of offering penile transplantation as treatment for penile loss as this is not only life enhancing but lifesaving, especially within the South African context.
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.