Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38028733›Full record

ArticleSexual medicine2023

Secondary phallic prosthesis placement in transgender patients postmetoidioplasty: a case report on technique and outcome.

Wietse Claeys, Laurens Weynants, Caroline Jamaer, Jolien Van der Jeugt, Piet Hoebeke, Anne-Françoise Spinoit

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Sexual medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Wietse ClaeysDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent 9000 Belgium.
Laurens WeynantsDepartment of Urology, AZ Sint-Lucas ziekenhuis Ghent, Belgium.
Caroline JamaerDepartment of Urology, Jessa Ziekenhuis, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium.
Jolien Van der JeugtDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent 9000 Belgium.
Piet HoebekeDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent 9000 Belgium.
Anne-Françoise SpinoitDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent 9000 Belgium.
Ghent University Hospital · BEAZ Sint-Lucas · BEJessa Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Gender affirming surgery is common among transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals. Genital gender-affirming surgery is a form of surgery that involves transformation and reconstruction of the genitalia while maintaining urologic and sexual function. Masculinizing genital gender-affirming surgery can involve the removal of the female genital and reproductive organs and the creation of a more masculine appearance by using phalloplasty or metoidioplasty techniques. While metoidioplasty has advantages such as limited scarring and preserved genital sensation and clitoral erection, it may not always guarantee the ability to void while standing or even penetrate a sexual partner. Aim: To describe our method of secondary phallic enhancement after metoidioplasty with a phallic prosthesis. Methods: Our case is based on a 39-year-old transgender male who underwent metoidioplasty with vaginectomy, scrotoplasty, and urethral lengthening. However, the original surgery was complicated by extensive hematoma formation in the suprapubic area and neoscrotum, leading to a buried position of the neophallus. Subsequent surgery was performed to reduce the prepubic fat pad and penoscrotal interposition, but it too was complicated by hematoma formation and wound dehiscence. To maximize phallic elongation, the tethering urethra was removed, and perineal urethrostomy was performed but could not sufficiently alleviate the buried phallus. As a further step to improve the outcome, we proposed the implantation of a specific phallic prosthesis designed for metoidioplasty with testicular prosthesis placement. Surgery was performed as a single procedure through a penoscrotal incision and greatly enhanced genital appearance. Results: Three months after surgery, the patient had good sensation of the phallus and was able to have satisfactory sexual activity with his partner. However, he remained dissatisfied with the amount of prepubic tissue and opted to undergo further liposuction. Conclusion: Phallic prosthesis implantation can be a procedure to improve the condition of multioperated cases of metoidioplasty with resistant phallic burying. Reconstruction with a phallic prosthesis was performed successfully in this case. However, long-term complications and functional outcomes, such as the ability to void while standing or penetrate a sexual partner, remain uncertain. Further experience is needed to determine the efficacy and safety of using a phallic prosthesis as a secondary procedure in patients undergoing metoidioplasty.

Indexed as

Erectile dysfunctionErection prosthesisMetoidioplastyReconstructive urologyTransgender care

Identifiers

PMID38028733
PMCPMC10661292
OpenAlexW4388876705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.