Introduction
Penile fracture is the rupture of the tunica of one or both corpora cavernosa due to direct blunt trauma to the erected penis. Partial or complete rupture of the urethra or injury to the deep dorsal vein may accompany penile fracture.
Aim
To compare conservative and surgical treatment modalities in terms of duration of hospitalization, early and late complications such as penile nodule and curvature, erectile dysfunction, and painful erection.
Main Outcome Measures
Treatment results and complications in two groups were evaluated with history and physical examination, and International Index of Erectile Function-5 Questionnaire was used for erectile function assessement.
Methods
The charts of 42 men diagnosed with penile fracture were retrospectively reviewed, and two treatment modalities were compared: conservative (Group I) and surgical (Group II).
Results
Between 1991 and 2008, a total of 42 patients with penile fracture were followed in our clinic for a mean of 18 months (range: 6–30 months). Five men who refused surgical treatment were treated conservatively, and the other 37 patients underwent surgical treatment. In Group II, the most common complication was painful erection (in 4 of 37 patients, 10.8 %), whereas in Group I, 80 % (4/5 patients) suffered complications such as wound infection, painful erection, penile nodule and curvature, and erectile dysfunction.
Conclusion
Diagnosis of penile fracture can be based on history and physical examination; diagnostic tests such as ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging are generally not required. Fractures must be repaired either immediately or delayed. Because management with emergency surgical repair is the most effective approach, with the lowest complication rate, surgical treatment should be preferred compared to a conservative approach.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the added role of T1-weighted (T1w) gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriamine penta-acetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC) compared with T2-weighted MRC (T2w-MRC) in the detection of biliary leaks.MethodsNinety-nine patients with suspected biliary complications underwent routine T2w-MRC and T1w contrast-enhanced (CE) MRC using Gd-EOB-DTPA to identify biliary leaks. Two observers reviewed the image sets separately and together. MRC findings were compared with those of surgery and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiopancreatography. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the techniques in identifying biliary leaks were calculated.ResultsAccuracy of locating biliary leaks was superior with the combination of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRC and T2w-MRC (P < 0.05).The mean sensitivities were 79 % vs 59 %, and the mean accuracy rates were 84 % vs 58 % for combined CE-MRC and T2w-MRC vs sole T2w-MRC. Nineteen out of 21 patients with biliary-cyst communication, 90.4 %, and 12/15 patients with post-traumatic biliary extravasations, 80 %, were detected by the combination of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRC and T2w-MRC images, P < 0.05.ConclusionsGd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRC yields information that complements T2w-MRC findings and improves the identification and localisation of the bile extravasations (84 % accuracy, 100 % specificity, P < 0.05). We recommend Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRC in addition to T2w-MRC to increase the preoperative accuracy of identifying and locating extravasations of bile.Key Points• Magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC) does not always detect bile leakage and cysto-biliary communications.• Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRC helps by demonstrating extravasation of contrast material into fluid collections.• Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRC also demonstrates the leakage site and bile duct injury type.• Combined Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced and T2w-MRC can provide comprehensive information about biliary system.• Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRC is non-invasive and does not use ionising radiation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.