ArticleJournal of medical case reports2026
Pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia of the prepuce, a benign mimic of penile squamous cell carcinoma: a case report.
Article in Journal of medical case reports, 2026. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia (PEH) is a benign reactive proliferation of squamous epithelium that can closely mimic squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) both clinically and histologically. PEH commonly arises in response to chronic irritation, infection, or trauma. Its occurrence in the prepuce is extremely rare and poses significant diagnostic challenges. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case of a 75-year-old Indian male who presented with a 1-year history of progressive penile swelling, accompanied by obstructive voiding symptoms over recent weeks. Physical examination revealed a thickened, nodular, and edematous prepuce with phimosis, raising strong clinical suspicion of penile carcinoma. Incisional biopsy revealed features consistent with PEH, characterized by marked acanthosis, elongated and anastomosing rete ridges, and absence of cytological atypia. The patient subsequently underwent complete circumcision. Histopathological analysis of the excised specimen confirmed the diagnosis of PEH. The postoperative course was uneventful with complete resolution of symptoms.
conclusionsThis case highlights the importance of including PEH in the differential diagnosis of suspicious penile lesions, particularly in elderly patients. Histopathological confirmation through biopsy is crucial to avoid unnecessary radical surgeries, such as partial or total penectomy. Early recognition and appropriate management can preserve function while ensuring optimal patient outcomes.
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.