Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes in men undergoing tunica albuginea plication for congenital penile curvature who present with worsening penile deformity

  • Topic Paper
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Men with congenital penile curvature (CPC) can develop new onset worsening of their lifelong curvature. We sought to evaluate clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes after tunica albuginea plication (TAP) in patients presenting with CPC who reported new onset worsened curvature (CPC-WC), and compare these with patients reporting stable lifelong curve (“CPC-only”).

Methods

A retrospective review of demographics, history/exam findings, and postoperative outcomes for patients with CPC who underwent TAP from 2012 to 2018 was performed. Patients were differentiated based on whether or not they reported new onset worsening of their penile curvature preoperatively (CPC-WC versus CPC only). Statistical analysis was performed to identify differences in clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes after TAP.

Results

60 patients were included [CPC only (n = 39) and CPC-WC (n = 21)]. Mean curvature was 62° (SD 23). CPC-WC patients were older [median 34 years (IQR 27:52) versus 24 years (IQR 20:34); p = 0.004], and more likely to report penile shortening and psychological bother (p < 0.05). On physical examination, CPC-WCs were more likely to have a discrete palpable tunical scar and diminished penile elasticity (p ≤ 0.0002). With median follow up of 12 months, satisfactory straightening with TAP was reported in 56/60 patients (93%) including 35/39 (90%) CPC only and 21/21 (100%) CPC-WC.

Conclusions

In men undergoing TAP for CPC, we found that 35% reported new onset worsening of their original curvature preoperatively. These patients were older and more likely to report penile shortening or exhibit palpable tunical scarring with decreased elasticity on examination compared to those with lifelong stable curvature. Regardless, TAP resulted in satisfactory penile straightening in the majority of patients.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baskin LS, Duckett JW, Lue TF (1996) Penile curvature. Urology 48(3):347–356

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Yachia D et al (1993) The incidence of congenital penile curvature. J Urol 150(5 Pt 1):1478–1479

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kramer SA, Aydin G, Kelalis PP (1982) Chordee without hypospadias in children. J Urol 128(3):559–561

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Montag S, Palmer LS (2011) Abnormalities of penile curvature: chordee and penile torsion. ScientificWorldJournal 11:1470–1478

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Stojanovic B et al (2011) Penile curvature incidence in hypospadias: can it be determined? Adv Urol 2011:813205

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Donnahoo KK et al (1998) Etiology, management and surgical complications of congenital chordee without hypospadias. J Urol 160(3 Pt 2):1120–1122

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kelami A (1983) Classification of congenital and acquired penile deviation. Urol Int 38(4):229–233

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bella AJ et al (2018) 2018 Canadian Urological Association guideline for Peyronie’s disease and congenital penile curvature. Can Urol Assoc J 12(5):E197–E209

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Menon V et al (2016) Do adult men with untreated ventral penile curvature have adverse outcomes? J Pediatr Urol 12(1):31.e1–31.e7

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nehra A et al (2015) Peyronie’s disease: AUA guideline. J Urol 194(3):745–753

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Al-Thakafi S, Al-Hathal N (2016) Peyronie’s disease: a literature review on epidemiology, genetics, pathophysiology, diagnosis and work-up. Transl Androl Urol 5(3):280–289

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Burri A, Porst H (2018) The relationship between penile deformity, age, psychological bother, and erectile dysfunction in a sample of men with Peyronie’s disease (PD). Int J Impot Res 30(4):171–178

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mateus M et al (2018) Understanding the role of adenosine receptors in the myofibroblast transformation in Peyronie’s disease. J Sex Med 15(7):947–957

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jiang H et al (2018) Repeated micro-trauma of the penile tunica albuginea: a new animal model of Peyronie’s disease. Urol Int 100(2):228–239

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tsambarlis P, Levine LA (2019) Nonsurgical management of Peyronie’s disease. Nat Rev Urol 16:172–186

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yafi FA et al (2018) Multi-institutional prospective analysis of intralesional injection of collagenase Clostridium histolyticum, tunical plication, and partial plaque excision and grafting for the management of Peyronie’s disease. Urology 120:138–142

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hatzimouratidis K et al (2012) EAU guidelines on penile curvature. Eur Urol 62(3):543–552

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Papagiannopoulos D, Yura E, Levine L (2015) Examining postoperative outcomes after employing a surgical algorithm for management of Peyronie’s disease: a single-institution retrospective review. J Sex Med 12(6):1474–1480

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Levine LA, Greenfield JM (2003) Establishing a standardized evaluation of the man with Peyronie’s disease. Int J Impot Res 15(Suppl 5):S103–S112

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Baskin LS, Duckett JW (1994) Dorsal tunica albuginea plication for hypospadias curvature. J Urol 151(6):1668–1671

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Papagiannopoulos D et al (2017) Surgical outcomes from limiting the use of nonabsorbable suture in tunica albuginea plication for Peyronie’s disease. Int J Impot Res 29(6):258–261

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Abern MR, Larsen S, Levine LA (2012) Combination of penile traction, intralesional verapamil, and oral therapies for Peyronie’s disease. J Sex Med 9(1):288–295

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ebbehoj J, Metz P (1987) Congenital penile angulation. Br J Urol 60(3):264–266

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zahran AR et al (2012) Congenital penile curvature presenting as unconsummated marriage. Repair by 16-dot plication with subjectively reported patient and partner satisfaction. Arab J Urol 10(4):429–433

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Bracka A (1989) A long-term view of hypospadias. Br J Plast Surg 42(3):251–255

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Makovey I et al (2012) Congenital penile curvature: update and management. Curr Urol Rep 13(4):290–297

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Walsh TJ et al (2013) How curved is too curved? The severity of penile deformity may predict sexual disability among men with Peyronie’s disease. Int J Impot Res 25(3):109–112

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Liguori G et al (2018) Objective measurements of the penile angulation are significantly different than self-estimated magnitude among patients with penile curvature. Int Braz J Urol 44(3):555–562

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Devine CJ Jr, Horton CE (1973) Chordee without hypospadias. J Urol 110(2):264–271

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Adams MC, Chalian VS, Rink RC (1999) Congenital dorsal penile curvature: a potential problem of the long phallus. J Urol 161(4):1304–1307

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Darewicz B et al (2001) Ultrastructure of the tunica albuginea in congenital penile curvature. J Urol 166(5):1766–1768

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Smith JF et al (2008) Risk factors for emotional and relationship problems in Peyronie’s disease. J Sex Med 5(9):2179–2184

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Richards G et al (2014) Penile sonoelastography for the localization of a non-palpable, non-sonographically visualized lesion in a patient with penile curvature from Peyronie’s disease. J Sex Med 11(2):516–520

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mulhall JP et al (2002) Peyronie’s disease cell culture models: phenotypic, genotypic and functional analyses. Int J Impot Res 14(5):397–405

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Chung E et al (2012) Penile Doppler sonographic and clinical characteristics in Peyronie’s disease and/or erectile dysfunction: an analysis of 1500 men with male sexual dysfunction. BJU Int 110(8):1201–1205

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Dibenedetti DB et al (2011) A population-based study of Peyronie’s disease: prevalence and treatment patterns in the United States. Adv Urol 2011:282503

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Lindsay MB et al (1991) The incidence of Peyronie’s disease in Rochester, Minnesota, 1950 through 1984. J Urol 146(4):1007–1009

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Salem EA (2018) Modified 16-Dot plication technique for correction of penile curvature: prevention of knot-related complications. Int J Impot Res 30(3):117–121

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Perdzynski W, Adamek M (2017) Three anatomical levels: possibilities to decrease invasiveness of reconstructive surgery for congenital penile curvature. Cent Eur J Urol 70(3):280–288

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Kadirov R et al (2017) Penile plication with or without degloving of the penis results in similar outcomes. Sex Med 5(3):e142–e147

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Vicini P et al (2016) Geometrical modified Nesbit corporoplasty to correct different types of penile curvature: description of the surgical procedure based on geometrical principles and long-term results. Int J Impot Res 28(6):209–215

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Shaeer O, Shaeer K (2016) Shaeer’s corporal rotation III: shortening-free correction of congenital penile curvature-the noncorporotomy technique. Eur Urol 69(1):129–134

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Zachalski W, Krajka K, Matuszewski M (2015) Evaluation of the treatment of congenital penile curvature including psychosexual assessment. J Sex Med 12(8):1828–1835

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Perdzynski W, Adamek M (2015) A new corporoplasty based on stratified structure of tunica albuginea for the treatment of congenital penile curvature—long-term results. Cent Eur J Urol 68(1):102–108

    Google Scholar 

  45. Alei G et al (2014) New surgical technique for ventral penile curvature without circumcision. BJU Int 113(6):968–974

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Cantoro U et al (2014) Plication corporoplasty for congenital penile curvature: our results with long-term follow-up. Int Urol Nephrol 46(9):1741–1746

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Akbulut F et al (2014) Neurovascular bundle dissection for Nesbit procedure in congenital penile curvature patients: medial or lateral? Asian J Androl 16(3):442–445

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Kuehhas FE, Egydio PH (2014) The STAGE technique (superficial tunica albuginea geometric-based excision) for the correction of biplanar congenital penile curvature. J Sex Med 11(1):299–306

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Schwarzer JU, Steinfatt H (2012) Tunica albuginea underlap–a new modification of the Nesbit procedure: description of the technique and preliminary results. J Sex Med 9(11):2970–2974

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kuehhas FE, Egydio PH (2012) Superficial tunica albuginea excision, using geometric principles, for the correction of congenital penile curvature. BJU Int 110(11 Pt C):E949–E953

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Basiri A et al (2011) Comparing absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures in corporeal plication for treatment of congenital penile curvature. Urol J 8(4):302–306

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Leonardo C et al (2012) Plication corporoplasty versus Nesbit operation for the correction of congenital penile curvature. A long-term follow-up. Int Urol Nephrol 44(1):55–60

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Seveso M et al (2010) Corporoplasty by plication: out patient surgery for the correction of penile curvature. Arch Ital Urol Androl 82(3):164–166

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Tal R et al (2010) Peyronie’s disease following radical prostatectomy: incidence and predictors. J Sex Med 7(3):1254–1261

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Dugi DD 3rd, Morey AF (2010) Penoscrotal plication as a uniform approach to reconstruction of penile curvature. BJU Int 105(10):1440–1444

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Colpi G et al (2009) Penile septoplasty for congenital ventral penile curvature: results in 51 patients. J Urol 182(4):1489–1494

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Nyirady P et al (2008) Management of congenital penile curvature. J Urol 179(4):1495–1498

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Ghanem H, Shamloul RM (2008) Incisional corporoplasty for the correction of congenital penile curvature: a review of two suturing techniques. Int J Impot Res 20(2):222–225

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Cavallini G, Caracciolo S (2008) Pilot study to determine improvements in subjective penile morphology and personal relationships following a Nesbit plication procedure for men with congenital penile curvature. Asian J Androl 10(3):512–519

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Tal R et al (2010) The psychosocial impact of penile reconstructive surgery for congenital penile deviation. J Sex Med 7(1 Pt 1):121–128

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Cordon BH et al (2017) Peyronie’s penile plication. Transl Androl Urol 6(4):639–644

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Mobley EM et al (2012) Update on plication procedures for Peyronie’s disease and other penile deformities. Ther Adv Urol 4(6):335–346

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Radopoulos D, Vakalopoulos I, Thanos P (2009) Preputial graft in penile curvature correction: preliminary results. Int J Impot Res 21(1):82–87

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No sources of funding were utilized.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 West Harrison Street, Suite #352, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA

    Matthew J. Ziegelmann, Michael Ryan Farrell & Laurence A. Levine

Authors
  1. Matthew J. Ziegelmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Ryan Farrell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laurence A. Levine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MJZ: protocol/project development, data collection or management, data analysis, manuscript writing/editing. MRF: protocol/project development, data collection or management, data analysis, manuscript writing/editing. LAL: protocol/project development, data collection or management, data analysis, manuscript writing/editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laurence A. Levine.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

Although retrospective studies are conducted on already available data or biological material (for which formal consent may not be needed or is difficult to obtain) ethical approval may be required dependent on the law and the national ethical guidelines of a country. Authors should check with their institution to make sure they are complying with the specific requirements of their country.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ziegelmann, M.J., Farrell, M.R. & Levine, L.A. Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes in men undergoing tunica albuginea plication for congenital penile curvature who present with worsening penile deformity. World J Urol 38, 305–314 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02787-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02787-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation