ArticleCureus2025
Isolated Urethral Injury Without Penile Fracture: A Case Report.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Love hurts: Conservative management of a rare isolated urethral tear after intercourse.Urology case reports · 2026Article
- Bleeding without fracture: Unmasking a penile arterial leak as a cause of urethrorrhagia.Urology case reports · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An isolated urethral injury without a penile fracture, particularly one resulting from sexual intercourse, is an infrequent occurrence. Urethral injury without concomitant penile fracture poses a diagnostic dilemma, being an uncommon clinical condition. Early recognition and prompt treatment are essential to prevent complications, which sparked this interest. We report a case of isolated proximal bulbar urethral injury without penile fracture following sexual intercourse in an 18-year-old male who presented with two days of peno-scrotal swelling. An initial diagnosis of bilateral epididymoorchitis was made. During admission, a urethral injury was suspected and subsequently confirmed. A peri-urethral abscess and a right hemiscrotal abscess complicated this injury. He was evaluated using an initial ultrasound testes and subsequently a CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis, and a pelvic MRI due to a diagnostic dilemma. He was treated with antibiotics, underwent urinary diversion via suprapubic cystostomy, flexible cystoscopic-guided urethral catheterisation, and scrotal exploration with drainage of peri-urethral and scrotal abscesses. A subsequent retrograde urethrogram confirmed satisfactory healing. The patient experienced an adequate recovery and healing, and he was followed up for four months without any urinary symptoms. Isolated urethral injuries without an associated penile fracture are uncommon clinical entities. However, when they do occur, they carry a significant risk of complications if not promptly identified. Among the potential sequelae of delayed diagnosis are peri-urethral and scrotal abscesses, which can lead to increased morbidity. These injuries may present atypically, especially following coital trauma, making a high index of clinical suspicion important. Early recognition, supported by appropriate imaging and timely intervention, is key to preventing functional complications. This case highlights the importance of early diagnosis and prompt treatment in optimising patient outcomes and minimising the risk of long-term complications.
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.