Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Utilities of scrotal flap for reconstruction of penile skin defects after severe burn injury

  • Urology - Review
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

In the present study, we aimed to present our experience of an effective two-stage surgical approach using scrotal skin flap for patients with penile skin defects following severe burn injury.

Materials and methods

A total of 17 patients with penile skin defects underwent scheduled two-stage reconstruction using scrotal skin flap from January 2004 to October 2016. Patients, who were selected as eligible candidates for scrotal flap, exhibited a wide range of indications, including iatrogenic injuries (e.g., diathermy treatment after circumcision), scalding, flame injuries and electrical burns. During the first stage, the denuded penis secondary to debridement was temporally embedded in scrotal skin flap through an intrascrotal tunnel created between the skin and darto’s fascia. During the second stage, the skin around the penis was separated and divided from the scrotum after incising the scrotal skin at the ventral penile base. After a mean follow-up of 30 months, the reconstructed penises yielded satisfactory aesthetic outcomes and maintained erectile function.

Results

The mean age of patients was 35 years (19–55 years), and the median follow-up was 30 months (12–60 months). No major perioperative complication occurred except for dehiscence of scrotal skin after 2nd stage in three patients, and split-thickness skin grafts were applied for recovery of scrotum. Of 17 cases, 15 patients (88.2%) were in satisfactory cosmetic appearance. All patients regained penile sensation and normal voiding function in standing position. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) was used to assess sexual function, with 13 patients (76.5%) reported normal erectile function, while the rest 4 reported mild erectile dysfunction. With regards to intercourse satisfaction domain, encouraging results indicated a total of 17 patients resumed sexual intercourse after surgery. In overall satisfaction domain, 11/17 (64.7%) reported a satisfaction from “very” to “moderately” with their overall sex life and sexual relationship with their partners, while only one patient reported “moderately dissatisfied” with his overall sex life.

Conclusions

We report a series of particular cases, including rare iatrogenic injury (diathermy treatment after circumcision) and severe compound electrical injury. Meanwhile, we show our successful experience that scrotal skin flap could be used as an effective surgical alternative to cover severe burn injury wound in male genitalia. The scrotal flap, with higher anti-infection ability and flexible contexture, is available for recovering penile skin defects following severe burn injury resulting in good aesthetic and sexual outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Finical SJ, Arnold PG (1999) Care of the degloved penis and scrotum: a 25-year experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 104:2074–2078

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Michielsen DP, Lafaire C (2010) Management of genital burns: a review. Int J Urol 17:755–758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Parnham AS, Albersen M, Sahdev V et al (2016) Glansectomy and split-thickness skin graft for penile cancer. Eur Urol. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2016.09.048

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Singh V, Sinha RJ, Sankhwar SN et al (2011) Reconstructive surgery for penoscrotal filarial lymphedema: a decade of experience and follow-up. Urology. 77(5):1228–1231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Asimakopoulos AD, Iorio B, Vespasiani G et al (2012) Autologous split-thickness skin graft for penile coverage in the treatment of buried (trapped) penis after radical circumcision. BJU Int 110(4):602–606

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kumar V, Ferreira PC, Reis JC, Amarante JM et al (2007) Fournier’s gangrene: a review of 43 reconstructive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 119:175–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chertin B, Kocherov S, Binenboym R et al (2016) Fenestrated sheet split-thickness skin grafting for reconstruction of penile skin loss in pediatric population. J Pediatr Surg 51:1362–1365

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Alwaal A, McAninch JW, Harris CR et al (2015) Utilities of split-thickness skin grafting for male genital reconstruction. Urology 86(4):835–839

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Sun GC, Zhong AG, He W et al (1990) Reconstruction of the external genitals and repair of skin defects of the perineal region using three types of lateral groin flap. Ann Plast Surg 24(4):328–334

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Momeni A, Abidari JM, Karanas YL (2013) The foreskin advancement flap: an alternative technique for reconstruction of penile burns. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66(4):570–573

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zucchi A, Perovic S, Lazzeri M et al (2010) Iatrogenic trapped penis in adults: new, simple 2-stage repair. J Urol 183(3):1060–1063

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhao YQ, Zhang J, Yu MS et al (2009) Functional restoration of penis with partial defect by scrotal skin flap. J Urol 182(5):2358–2361

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fakin R, Zimmermann S, Jindarak S et al (2017) Reconstruction of penile shaft defects following silicone injection by bipedicled anterior scrotal flap. J Urol 197(4):1166–1170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim SW, Yoon B, Ha US et al (2014) Treatment of paraffin-induced lipogranuloma of the penis by bipedicled scrotal flap with Y-V incision. Ann Plast Surg. 73(6):692–695

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Senchenkov A, Knoetgen J, Chrouser KL et al (2006) Application of dressing in penis skin graft reconstruction. Urology 67:416–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dwyer ME, Salgado CJ, Lightner DJ (2011) Normal penile, scrotal, and perineal anatomy with reconstructive considerations. Semin Plast Surg 25(3):179–188

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Carrera A, Gil-Vernet A, Forcada P et al (2009) Arteries of the scrotum: a microvascular study and its application to urethral reconstruction with scrotal flaps. BJU Int 103(6):820–824

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Grossman JA (1989) Cutaneous blood supply of the penis. Plast Reconstr Surg 83(2):213–216

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ubrig B, Waldner M, Fallahi M et al (2001) Preputial flap for primary closure after excision of tumors on the glans penis. Urology 58:274–276

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chu CC, Chen YH, Diau GY et al (2007) Preputial flaps to correct buried penis. Pediatr Surg Int 23:1119–1121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bozkurt M, Zor F, Kulahci Y et al (2009) An alternative flap choice in penis skin defects: preputial mucosal flap. Urology 74:1344–1346

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhao JC, Xian CJ, Yu JA et al (2013) Reconstruction of infected and denuded scrotum and penis by combined application of negative pressure wound therapy and split-thickness skin grafting. Int Wound J 10(4):407–410

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bajaj SP, Pande S, Ahmad I et al (2000) Abdominoperineal electrical injury involving urogenital organs. Burns 26:664–668

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Landecker A, Macieira L (2002) Penile and upper extremity amputation following high-voltage electrical trauma: case report. Burns 28:806–810

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Yavuz M, Dalay C, Kesiktas E et al (2006) Contact high-tension electrical burn to the penis: reconstruction of the defect with free radial forearm fasciocutaneous flap and silicon rod, a case report. Burns 32:788–791

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Huang XY, Zhang PH, Lei SR et al (2004) Repair of the penial injury in patients inflicted by high voltage electrical injury. Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi 20(4):223–225

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhu ZX, Xu XG, Li WP et al (2003) Experience of 14 years of emergency reconstruction of electrical injuries. Burns 29:65–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jiang JJ, Zhu FQ, Luo J et al (2004) Severe burn of penis caused by excessive short-wave diathermy. China Asian J Androl 6:377–378

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ghanem H, Glina S, Assalian P et al (2013) Position paper: management of men complaining of a small penis despite an actually normal size. J Sex Med 10(1):294–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G et al (1997) The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology 49:822–830

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sansalone S, Silvani M, Leonardi R et al (2017) Sexual outcomes after partial penectomy for penile cancer: results from a multi-institutional study. Asian J Androl 19(1):57–61

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Palminteri E, Fusco F, Berdondini E et al (2011) Aesthetic neo-glans reconstruction after penis-sparing surgery for benign, premalignant or malignant penile lesions. Arab J Urol 9(2):115–120

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 30973121 and No. 81471868).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Burns and Reconstructive Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Xiangya Road No. 87, Changsha, 41008, Hunan, People’s Republic of China

    Le Guo, Minghua Zhang, Jizhang Zeng, Pengfei Liang, Pihong Zhang & Xiaoyuan Huang

Authors
  1. Le Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Minghua Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jizhang Zeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pengfei Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pihong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xiaoyuan Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

XH, MZ, PZ and LG designed the study; MZ, LG, XH and JZ performed the surgery. LG and PL conducted the literature review; JZ, MZ and PL prepared the figures; LG wrote the manuscript; MZ and XH critically appraised the draft manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiaoyuan Huang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guo, L., Zhang, M., Zeng, J. et al. Utilities of scrotal flap for reconstruction of penile skin defects after severe burn injury. Int Urol Nephrol 49, 1593–1603 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-017-1635-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-017-1635-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation