ArticleIrish journal of medical science2024
Surgical management and post-operative functional outcomes of patients with a penile fracture-a single centre experience over 10 years.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPenile fractures are uncommon urological emergencies which occur when there has been a breach in the tunica albuginea of the corpora cavernosum that may be unilateral and bilateral and can extend to involve the urethra.
aimTo assess the management and outcomes of penile fractures in a single institution in Ireland.
methodsA retrospective review of the emergency theatre logbooks was performed between 2011 and 2021 to identify patients who had undergone an exploration for a suspected penile fracture. OUTCOMES: Seventeen patients were initially identified on review of theatre logbooks as having an exploration for a suspected penile fracture. Two patients were excluded from the study due to a lack of clinical notes being available. A further 4 patients on chart review were found to not have a penile fracture at exploration.
resultsEleven patients had a confirmed penile fracture intra-operatively, four of whom had an associated urethral injury. Nine (9/11) patients had preserved normal erections post-operatively documented on follow-up; two, however, reported erectile dysfunction requiring phosphodiesterase inhibitors. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our study supports urgent surgical exploration for penile fractures to ensure good functional outcomes. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective review of theatre logbooks to identify patients with a suspected penile fracture.
conclusionThe results of our cohort show a good outcome of erectile function following surgical repair of a penile fracture (9/11; 82%). Four patients (4/11; 36%) had a urethral injury diagnosed intra-operatively, one of whom required a formal urethroplasty.
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.