ArticleCureus2026
Penile Reconstruction With a Pedicled Suprapubic Flap After Cutaneous Necrosis Secondary to Modeling Substance Disease: A Case Report.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Penile cutaneous necrosis is an uncommon but severe clinical condition that may result from necrotizing infections, vascular compromise, or complications related to cosmetic procedures. The subcutaneous injection of non-medical modeling substances has been associated with chronic inflammatory reactions, fibrosis, and progressive tissue destruction that may ultimately lead to infection and skin necrosis. We report the case of a 68-year-old male with diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular comorbidities who developed extensive penile skin necrosis after subcutaneous injection of non-medical modeling substances for cosmetic augmentation. The patient presented with progressive penile pain, edema, and skin discoloration that evolved into a necrotizing soft tissue infection of the penile shaft. Radical surgical debridement was performed while preserving the corpora cavernosa and urethra. Due to the extent of the skin defect and the compromised condition of the recipient bed, immediate reconstruction was performed using a pedicled suprapubic fasciocutaneous flap based on local perforator vessels. Four weeks later, a second-stage procedure with pedicle division and definitive flap inset was successfully performed. The postoperative course was uneventful, with complete flap survival and satisfactory restoration of penile shaft coverage and contour. This case highlights the severe complications associated with non-medical penile augmentation procedures and demonstrates that pedicled suprapubic flaps represent a reliable reconstructive option for extensive penile defects, particularly in compromised surgical fields following infection or foreign-body reactions.
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.