Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41069915›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

A Case Report on Penile Reconstruction to Correct Secondary Penoscrotal Webbing.

Raghavendra Chintha, Manimaran R, Koppolu Kanchana

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

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

3 authors.

Raghavendra ChinthaGeneral Surgery, Sree Balaji Medical College and Hospital, Chennai, IND.
Manimaran RGeneral Surgery, Sree Balaji Medical College and Hospital, Chennai, IND.
Koppolu KanchanaPlastic Surgery, Sree Balaji Medical College and Hospital, Chennai, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Circumcision of the penis is a common practice in different parts of the world. Although very common, this procedure is associated with non-favorable outcomes if not carried out by trained professionals or clinicians. Penoscrotal webbing, if not congenital, is a noted complication, usually associated with circumcision. Severe penoscrotal webbing requires attention due to its functional impairments. Surgical management is a routine practice for the correction of penoscrotal webbing. This is a case of a 19-year-old male presenting with difficulty voiding urine and penoscrotal webbing. He was managed with VY scrotoplasty. The patient has symptomatic relief and was found to be recovering well. This case aims to highlight the challenges in diagnosis and the need for early intervention and multispecialty involvement for managing such cases.

Indexed as

circumcisionpenoscrotal webbingreconstructive surgeryvy scrotoplastywebbing

Identifiers

PMID41069915
PMCPMC12505410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.