Introduction & Objectives: Prone position has been the standard for PCNL in years, whereas the supine position has recently started to gain popularity. The study for surgical outcomes still vary and study for cost-effectiveness are still lacking. We aimed to compare the surgical outcomes and cost effectiveness of prone versus supine PCNL in our institution.

Background: Penile amputation is an emergency urologic condition requiring immediate attention in order to maximize functional outcomes. Unfortunately, there is limited experience and publication of case reports describing the successful replantation of penis after incomplete amputation, especially in facilities without adequate microsurgical tools and means. We hereby present a case of penile amputation caused by a mechanical grass cutter and a discussion of its surgical management. Case description: A 33-year-old Indonesian male presented to the emergency department with incomplete penile amputation six hours post injury. The patient has no prior medical history and presented with penile amputation due to a mechanical grass cutter trauma. He underwent immediate non-microsurgery reconstructive replantation of the penis, reattaching all visible vascular, corporal, and fascia layers. After replantation, the patient recovered well and showed preserved normal appearance and sensitivity of the penis. Subsequent Doppler ultrasound investigation revealed adequate arterial flow at the distal end of the anastomosis. The patient was discharged five days after surgery.  Conclusion: In the absence of microsurgical tools and means, the use of non-microsurgical replantation with an at least 2.5x loupe magnification should be the choice of treatment in the case of incomplete penile amputation. The technique showed good outcomes involving adequate functional and cosmetic restoration.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract