EFFECTIVENESS OF PENILE VENTRAL SCROTUM COHESION PLACE WEDGE CUTTING AND IMPROVED Brisson TECHNIQUE FOR CONGENITAL BURIED PENIS_Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

Authors：

ZHANG Huafeng.

Department of Pediatric Surgery, Yishui Central Hospital of Linyi, Linyi Shandong, 276400, P.R.China. Corresponding author: ZHANG Huafeng, E-mail: zhanghuafeng09@126.com;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

Congenital buried penis; Correct surgery Improved; Brisson technique

DOI：

10.7507/1002-1892.20130241

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To investigate the effectiveness of the penile ventral scrotum cohesion place wedge cutting and improved Brisson technique for congenital buried penis. Methods Between March 2010 and June 2012, 68 boys with congenital buried penis were treated by the penile ventral scrotum cohesion place wedge cutting and improved Brisson technique, with a median age of 4 years and 10 months (range, 3 months-13 years). Of 68 cases, 14 were classified as phimosis type, 14 as rope belt type, 20 as moderate type, and 20 as severe type. The body of penis developed well and had no deformity. After operation, complications were observed, and the effectiveness was evaluated by the designed questionnaire. Results Early postoperative complications occurred in 11 cases, including obvious adhesion of the outside wrapping mouth in 4 cases, scrotal skin bloat in 5 cases, and distal foreskin necrosis in 2 cases; long-term complications occurred in 9 cases, including abdominal incision scar formation in 4 cases, wrapping mouth scar stricture in 3 cases, and short penis in 2 cases. Primary healing of incision was obtained in the other boys. Fifty-four cases were followed up 6-12 months (mean, 8 months). According to the designed questionnaire, satisfaction rate with the overall view in parents was 77.78% (42/54); the clinical improvement rate was 85.19% (46/54); exposure of the penis was satisfactory in parents of 50 cases; and the parents had no psychological burden of penis exposure in 46 cases, which were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones (P ﹤ 0.05). The boys had no psychological burden of penis exposure in 29 cases (53.70%) after operation, showing no significant difference when compared with preoperative one (18 cases, 33.33%) (χ2=1.22, P=0.31). Conclusion Application of the penile ventral scrotum cohesion place wedge cutting and improved Brisson technique can effectively correct congenital buried penis.

Citation： ZHANG Huafeng.. EFFECTIVENESS OF PENILE VENTRAL SCROTUM COHESION PLACE WEDGE CUTTING AND IMPROVED Brisson TECHNIQUE FOR CONGENITAL BURIED PENIS. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 2013, 27(9): 1102-1105. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.20130241 Copy

1.	Herndon CD, Casale AJ, Cain MP, et al. Long-term outcome of the surgical treatment of concealed penis. J Urol, 2003, 170(4 Pt 2): 1695-1697.
2.	Abbas M, Liard A, Elbaz F, et al. Outcome of surgical management of concealed penis. J Penis Urol, 2007, 3(6): 490-494.
3.	Bregesoni PS, Hopkin RJ, Bailey RB Jr, et al. The inconspicuous penis. Pediatrics, 1993, 92(6): 794-799.
4.	陈于明. 隐匿阴茎问题的再认识. 中华小儿外科杂志, 2000, 21(6): 379-380.
5.	李波涌, 张国富, 文定军, 等. 隐匿阴茎不同术式的疗效比较. 中国医师杂志, 2002, 4(8): 868-869.
6.	Boemers TM, De Jong TP. The surgical correction of buried penis: a new technique. J Urol, 1995, 154(2 Pt1): 550-552.
7.	Perger L, Hanley RS, Feins NR. Penoplasty for buried penis in infants and children: report of 100 cases. Pediatr Surg Int, 2009, 25(2): 175-180.
8.	Asimakopoulos AD, Iorio B, Vespasiani G, et al. Autologous split-thickness skin graft for penile coverage in the treatment of buried (trapped) penis after radical circumcision. BJU Int, 2012, 110(4): 602-606.
9.	Salgado CJ, Chim H, Tang JC, et al. Penile reconstruction. Semin Plast Surg, 2011, 25(3): 221-228.
10.	Brisson P, Patel H, Chan M, et al. Penoplasty for buried penis in children: report of 50 cases. J Pediatr Surg, 2001, 36(3): 421-425.
11.	董灵芝. 小儿隐匿阴茎成形术的围手术期护理. 护理实践与研究, 2012, 9(5): 73-74.
12.	唐达星, 吴德华, 陶畅, 等. 隐匿性阴茎矫治术后常见并发症及处理. 中华男科学杂志, 2012, 18(5): 450-454.
13.	彭琳, 刘加胜, 张艳. 先天性隐匿阴茎术后常见不适与并发症的预防及护理. 检验医学与临床, 2011, 8(15): 1855-1856.

1. Herndon CD, Casale AJ, Cain MP, et al. Long-term outcome of the surgical treatment of concealed penis. J Urol, 2003, 170(4 Pt 2): 1695-1697.
2. Abbas M, Liard A, Elbaz F, et al. Outcome of surgical management of concealed penis. J Penis Urol, 2007, 3(6): 490-494.
3. Bregesoni PS, Hopkin RJ, Bailey RB Jr, et al. The inconspicuous penis. Pediatrics, 1993, 92(6): 794-799.
4. 陈于明. 隐匿阴茎问题的再认识. 中华小儿外科杂志, 2000, 21(6): 379-380.
5. 李波涌, 张国富, 文定军, 等. 隐匿阴茎不同术式的疗效比较. 中国医师杂志, 2002, 4(8): 868-869.
6. Boemers TM, De Jong TP. The surgical correction of buried penis: a new technique. J Urol, 1995, 154(2 Pt1): 550-552.
7. Perger L, Hanley RS, Feins NR. Penoplasty for buried penis in infants and children: report of 100 cases. Pediatr Surg Int, 2009, 25(2): 175-180.
8. Asimakopoulos AD, Iorio B, Vespasiani G, et al. Autologous split-thickness skin graft for penile coverage in the treatment of buried (trapped) penis after radical circumcision. BJU Int, 2012, 110(4): 602-606.
9. Salgado CJ, Chim H, Tang JC, et al. Penile reconstruction. Semin Plast Surg, 2011, 25(3): 221-228.
10. Brisson P, Patel H, Chan M, et al. Penoplasty for buried penis in children: report of 50 cases. J Pediatr Surg, 2001, 36(3): 421-425.
11. 董灵芝. 小儿隐匿阴茎成形术的围手术期护理. 护理实践与研究, 2012, 9(5): 73-74.
12. 唐达星, 吴德华, 陶畅, 等. 隐匿性阴茎矫治术后常见并发症及处理. 中华男科学杂志, 2012, 18(5): 450-454.
13. 彭琳, 刘加胜, 张艳. 先天性隐匿阴茎术后常见不适与并发症的预防及护理. 检验医学与临床, 2011, 8(15): 1855-1856.

Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

EFFECTIVENESS OF PENILE VENTRAL SCROTUM COHESION PLACE WEDGE CUTTING AND IMPROVED Brisson TECHNIQUE FOR CONGENITAL BURIED PENIS

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content