Konjenital penil kurvatür cerrahi tedavi sonuçlarımız

Abstract

Amaç: Konjenital penil kurvatür hayatı tehdit eden bir hastalık olmamakla beraber penisin kozmetik açıdan görüntüsünü bozar ve cinsel ilişkiye engel olabilir. Tek tedavisi cerrahi olarak eğriliğin düzeltilmesidir. Biz konjenital penil kurvatür nedeniyle tunikal plikasyon ve Nesbit yöntemi uyguladığımız 16 hastayı sunmayı amaçladıkGereç ve Yöntemler: İki farklı klinikte Nisan 2011 ve Ocak 2014 tarihleri arasında yapılan 16 penil kurvatür olgusunun dosyaları geriye dönük olarak incelendi. Hastaların penis eğriliğinden dolayı cinsel ilişkiye girmekte zorlanmaları ve/veya penisin görüntüsünden kozmetik olarak rahatsız olmaları cerrahi endikasyonu olarak kabul edildi ve hastaların tamamına Nesbit prosedüre yada tunikal plikasyon uygulandı. Hastaların ilk di. Penil hipoestezi ise iki hastada görüldü. Sonuç: Konjenital penil kurvatür tedavisinde hem nesbit prosedürü hemde tunikal plikasyon etkin ve güvenilir yöntemlerdir. Operasyon sonrası dönemde penil hissizlik ile sütür matertalinin verdiği rahatsız en sık karşılaşılan şikayetler olarak ön plana çıkmaktadır

Keywords

• Konjenital penil kurvatür,Plikasyon,Nesbit

Our surgical results of congenital penile curvature

Abstract

Objective: Even though penile curvature is not a life-threatening disease, it affects the appearance of the penis and may interfere with patient’s sexual life. Congenital penile curvature can only be treated surgically. In this article we present 16 patients who have undergone tunical plication or Nesbit procedure for their conjenital penile curvatures. Materials and Methods: This study is a review of retrospectively collected charts of 16 patients from 2 different clinics who have undergone penile curvature surgery between April 2011 and January 2014. Patients discomfort during sexual intercourse or cosmetic reasons are accepted as surgery indications and every patient has undergone tunical plication or Nesbit procedure. Patients admittance reason to the clinics, penile curvature degree, surgery type nesbit procedure, tunical plication , operation duration and length of stay in the hospital, early complications and patient’s satisfactions were all evaluated for this study. Results: The mean age of patients were 22.75±5.52 years range 13-32 . Ten patients have undergone Nesbit procedure and six patients have undergone tunical plication procedure. The mean degree of curvature before procedure was 43.13±11.67 degrees range 30 and 67 . The degree of curvature was statistically significant higher in patients who have undergone Nesbit procedure when compared to patients who have undergone tunical plication procedure p:0.049 . During the follow-up period 15.2±7.3 months 11 of our patients had reported no complaints. One patient reported a complaint of ‘sensation of suture material’ and shortening of penis. One other patient reported both hipoesthesia and the ‘sensation of suture material’ complaint. Two other patients reported penile hipoesthesia. Conclusion: Nesbit procedure and tunical plication procedure are effective and safe treatment options in conjenital penile curvature. Penil hipoesthesia and ‘sensation of suture material’ are the two most common complaints after these procedures.

Keywords

• Congenital penile curvature, plication, Nesbit

References

1. Makovey I, Higuchi TT, Montague DK, Angermeier KW, Wood HM. Congenital penile curvature: update and ma- nagement. Curr Urol Rep 2012;13:290-7.
2. Friedrich MG, Evans D, Noldus J, Huland H. The correcti- on of penile curvature with the Essed-Schroder technique: a longterm follow-up assessing functional aspects and qu- ality of life. BJU Int 2000; 86: 1034–8.
3. Hsieh JT, Huang HE, Chen J, Chang HC, Liu SP. Modified plication of the tunica albuginea in treating congenital pe- nile curvature. BJU Int 2001;88:236-40.
4. Nooter RI, Bosch JL, Schroder FH. Peyronie’s disease and congenital penile curvature: long-term results of ope- rative treatment with the plication procedure. Br J Urol 1994;74:497-500.
5. Yachia D, Beyar M, Aridogan IA, Dascalu S. The incidence of congenital penile curvature. J Urol 1993;150:1478-9.
6. Rolle L, Tamagnone A, Timpano M, et al. The Nesbit ope- ration for penile curvature: an easy and effective technical modification. J Urol 2005;173:171-3; discussion 3-4.
7. Van Der HC, Martinez Portillo FJ, Seif C, et al. Treatment of penile curvature with Essed-Schroder tunical plication: aspects of quality of life from the patients’ perspective.BJU Int 2004;93:105–8.
8. Donnahoo KK, Cain MP, Pope JC et al: Etiology, mana- gement and surgical complications of congenital chordee without hypospadias J Urol 1998; 160: 1120.

9. Gholami SS, Lue TF. Correction of penile curvature using the 16-dot plication technique: a review of 132 patients J Urol 2002;167:2066–9.
10. Nesbit RM: Congenital curvature of the phallus. Report of three cases with description of corrective operation. J Urol 1965;93:230–2.
11. Catuogno C, Romano G. Androstanolone treatment for congenital penile curvature. Eur Urol. 2001 Jan;39 Suppl 2:28-32.
12. Baskin LS, Sutherland RS, DiSandro MJ, et al: The effect of testosterone on androgen receptors and human penile growth. J Urol 1997;158:1113.
13. Kelami A. Congenital penile deviation and its treatment with the Nesbit-Kelami technique. Br J Urol 1987;60: 261–3.
14. Andrews HO, al-Akraa M, Pryor JP, Ralph DJ. The Nesbit operation for congenital curvature of the penis. Int J Impot Res 1999;11:119-22.
15. Thiounn N, Missirliu A, Zerbib M, et al. Corporeal plicati- on for surgical correction of penile curvature. Experience with 60 patients. Eur Urol. 1998;33:401-4.
16. Chien GW, Aboseif SR: Corporeal plication for the treat- ment of congenital penile curvature. J Urol 2003; 169: 599.
17. Poulsen J, Kirkeby HJ. Treatment of penile curvature- -a retrospective study of 175 patients operated with plication of the tunica albuginea or with the Nesbit procedure. Br J Urol 1995;75:370-4.
18. van der Horst C, Martinez Portillo FJ, Melchior D et al. Polytetrafluoroethylene versus polypropylene sutures for Essed-Schroeder tunical plication. J Urol 2003;170:472-5.