Non‐invasive and surgical penile enhancement interventions for aesthetic or therapeutic purposes: a systematic review. (2nd September 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Romero‐Otero, Javier; Manfredi, Celeste; Ralph, David; Osmonov, Daniar; Verze, Paolo; Castiglione, Fabio; Serefoglu, Ege Can; Bozzini, Giorgio; García‐Gómez, Borja
• Is Part Of: BJU international. Volume 127:Number 3(2021)
• Page Start: 269
• Page End: 291
• Publication Date: 2020-09-02
• Subjects: penis surgery -- penile augmentation -- penile enlargement -- penile lengthening -- penile straightening -- erectile dysfunction -- penile curvature -- penile prosthesis -- #erectiledysfunction -- #Andrology; Genitourinary organs -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Genitourinary organs -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Urology -- Periodicals; 616.6
• DOI: 10.1111/bju.15145
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1464-4096

Abstract

Abstract : 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.