Penile Girth Enlargement Strategies: What’s the Evidence?

Hehemann, Marah; Towe, Maxwell; Huynh, Linda; El‐Khatib, Farouk M.; Yafi, Faysal A.

doi:10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.11.003

Cited by 38 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding suggests that the filler injection for PA might alleviate the psychological distress associated with sexual performance [15]. It also supports the idea that men who want to enlarge their penis have psychological distress that could require counseling or psychotherapy [18].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Hyaluronic and Polylactic Acid Filler Injections for Penile Augmentation in Men Reporting a Small Penis: A Multicenter, Patient-Blinded/Evaluator-Blinded, Non-Inferiority, Randomized Comparative Trial with 18 Months of Follow-up

Yang

Jeong

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although several types of penile augmentation (PA) fillers have been recently introduced, no long-term follow-up studies have compared them. This study aimed to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HA) and polylactic acid (PLA) filler injections for PA. Our multicenter, patient-blinded/evaluator-blinded, randomized comparative trial was performed for 18 months after the single injection of fillers. Sixty-seven healthy men reporting a small penis were administered an injection between November 2016 and May 2017. Subjects were divided into the HA group (n = 33) and PLA group (n = 34). At 18 months, the mean penile girths had significantly increased in both groups (each p < 0.001). Changes in the mean penile girth of both groups were not significantly different during the study period. Satisfaction levels at 18 months were significantly higher than those at baseline in both groups (each p < 0.01). Changes in satisfaction levels did not differ significantly during the study period. Injection-associated adverse events (AEs) occurred in three (9.1%) patients in the HA group and in two (5.9%) patients in the PLA group; no serious AEs occurred. In conclusion, HA and PLA filler injections for PA led to significant augmentation and increased satisfaction. Clinical efficacy and safety were comparable between groups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

“…Therefore, various types of surgical and non-surgical PA methods have been introduced [6]. However, these PA methods do not have clearly proven efficacy and safety, and they have not been globally approved [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Hyaluronic and Polylactic Acid Filler Injections for Penile Augmentation in Men Reporting a Small Penis: A Multicenter, Patient-Blinded/Evaluator-Blinded, Non-Inferiority, Randomized Comparative Trial with 18 Months of Follow-up

Yang

Jeong

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, previous reviews had acknowledged the lack of valid methods for evaluating outcomes, particularly in interventions with aesthetic indication [5,6]. Unlike the previous reviews [5–7,10], this is the first paper that comprehensively analyses both interventions performed for purely aesthetic purposes and procedures performed for therapeutic reasons in patients with concomitant penile disorders. Furthermore, it does not focus on a specific group of interventions (surgical or non‐invasive) or a specific condition or disease (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The papers included in the present review analysed changes in penile dimensions inconsistently, underscoring the lack of a consensus to assess and report efficacy outcomes. Similarly, previous reviews had acknowledged the lack of valid methods for evaluating outcomes, particularly in interventions with aesthetic indication [5,6]. Unlike the previous reviews [5–7,10], this is the first paper that comprehensively analyses both interventions performed for purely aesthetic purposes and procedures performed for therapeutic reasons in patients with concomitant penile disorders.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non‐invasive and surgical penile enhancement interventions for aesthetic or therapeutic purposes: a systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To systematically review the literature in order to investigate the efficacy and safety of surgical and non‐invasive penile enhancement procedures for aesthetic and therapeutic purposes. Methods A systematic search for papers investigating penile enhancement procedures was performed using the MEDLINE database. Articles published from January 2010 to December 2019, written in English, including >10 cases, and reporting objective length and/or girth outcomes, were included. Studies without primary data and conference abstracts were excluded. The main outcome measure was objective length and/or girth improvement. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Results Out of 220 unique records, a total of 57 were reviewed. Eighteen studies assessed interventions for penile enhancement in 1764 healthy men complaining of small penis. Thirty‐nine studies investigated 2587 men with concomitant pathologies consisting mostly of Peyronie's disease and erectile dysfunction. Twenty‐five studies evaluated non‐invasive interventions and 32 studies assessed surgical interventions, for a total of 2192 and 2159 men, respectively. Non‐invasive interventions, including traction therapies and injection of fillers, were safe and mostly efficacious, whereas surgical interventions were associated with minor complications and mostly increased penile dimensions and/or corrected penile curvature. Overall, the quality of studies was low, and standardized criteria to evaluate and report efficacy and safety of procedures, as well as patient satisfaction, were missing. Conclusion The quality of the studies on penile enhancement procedures published in the last decade is still low. This prevents us from establishing recommendations based on scientific evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions that are performed to increase the penis size for aesthetic or therapeutic indications.

show abstract

“…Several strategies for PGE are available; however, there is an obvious lack of clinical recommendations and robust literature that adequately describe indications or strategies primarily for penile girth enlargement (36). The role of medical therapy with oral phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitor in PGE has not been sufficiently studied.…”

Section: Penile Girth Expansion (Pge) Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Penile shortening complaints in males with erectile dysfunction: a narrative review on penile lengthening procedures during penile prosthesis surgery

Khalil

Machado

Miranda³

et al. 2021

Transl Androl Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients complaining of short penile length pose a challenge in urology practice. Those men who present seeking penile lengthening surgery usually overestimate 'normal' penile length, and may in often cases relate their penile length with the degree of masculinity and self-esteem. Penile prosthetic devices are the gold standard treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) after failure of conservative options. Penile shortening is the most prevalent long-term complaint after successful inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement. This has a significant impact on patient's overall satisfaction and quality of life. Using PubMed, we performed a thorough literature review of the current procedures of preservation or enhancement of penile length as well as reported perioperative protocols in patients undergoing penile prosthesis (PP) insertion. Keywords used were "penile lengthening", "penile enhancement", "penile girth", "inflatable penile prosthesis" and "glans augmentation". Several surgical techniques can be offered in the setting of penile shortening concurrently with PP insertion, e.g., sub-coronal approach of PP placement, sliding technique, modified sliding technique (MoST), multiple-slide technique (MuST), and tunica mesh expansion procedure (TMEP). Adjuvant techniques can also improve subjective penile length include, ventral phalloplasty, suprapubic lipectomy, suspensory ligament release and use of expanding penile implants. Preoperative protocols including use of a vacuum erectile device, traction therapy also seem to improve postoperative outcomes, minimizing postoperative pain, and encouraging the early device use. Currently, there is no consensus among experts on a particular lengthening procedure or when they can be performed to optimize outcomes. Furthermore, it is imperative to set proper expectations before surgery, with extensive patient and partner counseling. When used in the properly selected patient, penile lengthening procedures show promising results with minimal complication rates.

show abstract

Penile Girth Enlargement Strategies: What’s the Evidence?

Cited by 38 publications

References 54 publications

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Hyaluronic and Polylactic Acid Filler Injections for Penile Augmentation in Men Reporting a Small Penis: A Multicenter, Patient-Blinded/Evaluator-Blinded, Non-Inferiority, Randomized Comparative Trial with 18 Months of Follow-up

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Hyaluronic and Polylactic Acid Filler Injections for Penile Augmentation in Men Reporting a Small Penis: A Multicenter, Patient-Blinded/Evaluator-Blinded, Non-Inferiority, Randomized Comparative Trial with 18 Months of Follow-up

Non‐invasive and surgical penile enhancement interventions for aesthetic or therapeutic purposes: a systematic review

Penile shortening complaints in males with erectile dysfunction: a narrative review on penile lengthening procedures during penile prosthesis surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About