Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The effect and comparative observation of the Z-shaped cross flap method on the ventral side of the penis and the transfer flap method on the dorsal side of the penis in pediatric phalloplasty / 中华泌尿外科杂志
Chinese Journal of Urology ; (12): 365-369, 2021.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-885023
ABSTRACT

Objective:

To explore the clinical effects of penile ventral Z-shaped cross flap and penile dorsal pedicled transfer flap in penoplasty for concealed penis.

Methods:

From January 2017 to June 2019, the data of 151 patients with concealed penis admitted to our hospital was retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the surgical method. 69 cases were treated with penis ventral Z-shaped cross flap to form penis and 82 cases were treated with dorsal penis pedicled flaps to form the penis. In Z-shaped flap group, the penis length of 33 patients with tight scrotum was (3.06±0.25)cm before surgery and the penis length of 36 patients with relaxed scrotum was (2.99±0.28) cm before surgery. In flap with transfer group, the penis length of 39 patients with tight scrotum was (3.04±0.30)cm before surgery and the penis of 43 patients with relaxed scrotum was (3.04±0.24)cm before surgery. The length of the penis after surgery and incidence of postoperative complications were compared between Z-shaped flap group and flap with transfer group. Common complications included penile body retraction, foreskin edema, foreskin stenosis and penile wound splitting.

Results:

151 patients were followed up for 6-12 months, and all patients were satisfied with penis appearance. There was no penile necrosis or urinary fistula. In Z-shaped flap cross group, the penis length of 33 patients with tight scrotum extended (2.47±0.22)cm after surgery.The penis length of 36 patients with scrotum relaxation extended (2.61±0.27)cm after surgery, 39 patients was adopted the penile dorsal pedicled transfer flap with scrotum tight had extended penis (2.90± 0.16)cm, which significantly different from the Z-shaped flap group( P<0.05). In flap with transfer group, 43 patients with relaxed scrotum extended (2.79±0.18)cm after surgery, which was significantly different from the Z-shaped flap group ( P<0.05). In Z-shaped flap group, 33 patients with scrotum tight, there were 2 cases of penile retraction, 1 case of stenosis of the foreskin, 2 cases of foreskin edema, 2 cases of penile wound rupture. In transfer flap group, of 39 patients with scrotum tight, there was 1 case of foreskin edema. The incidence of complications that adopted the penile dorsal pedicled transfer flap with scrotum tight was lower than those adopted penile ventral Z-shaped cross flap [2.56%(1/39) vs. 21.21%(7/33), P=0.033]. In transfer flap group, of the 43 patients with scrotum relaxation, there were 3 cases of penile retraction, 3 cases of foreskin stenosis, 2 cases of penile ventral foreskin edema, and 1 case of penile wound rupture. Z-shaped flap group 36 patients was scrotum relaxation was 1 case of foreskin edema. The incidence of complications that adopted the penile dorsal pedicled transfer flap was higer than those adopted penile ventral Z-shaped flap [20.93%(9/43) vs. 2.78%(1/36), P =0.038].

Conclusions:

In terms of children with tight scrotum or loose scrotum, the effect of the transfer flap method to extend the penis is better than that of the Z-shaped flap method. However, the transfer flap method has a low complication rate for children with tight scrotum, while the Z-shaped flap method has a low complication rate for children with loose scrotum.
Full text: Available Index: WPRIM (Western Pacific) Language: Chinese Journal: Chinese Journal of Urology Year: 2021 Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS

Full text: Available Index: WPRIM (Western Pacific) Language: Chinese Journal: Chinese Journal of Urology Year: 2021 Type: Article