Efficacy and safety of a newly developed polylactic acid microsphere as an injectable bulking agent for penile augmentation: 18-months follow-up

Complications and outcomes following injection of foreign material into the male external genitalia for augmentation: a single-centre experience and systematic review

Injection of exogenous material into the penis and scrotum has been performed for augmentation purposes. Complications include cosmetic dissatisfaction, penile necrosis and lymphoedema. We report the complications and outcomes from a single centre with an updated systematic review of the literature. A retrospective review of all cases presenting with foreign substance injection into the genitalia, over a 10-year period was performed. Thirty-five patients with a mean (standard deviation (SD); range) age of 36.9 (±9.1; 22-61) years at presentation were included. The mean (SD; range) time between injection and presentation was 7.8 (±5.8; 1 day-20 years) years. The most common injected substance was silicone (n = 16, 45.7%) and liquid paraffin (n = 8, 22.9%). The penile shaft (94.3%) was the most injected site. The most common presentations were cosmetic dissatisfaction (57.1%) and pain and/or swelling (45.7%). Surgery was required in 32 (91.4%) cases. Primary procedures included local excision and primary closure (n = 19, 59.4%), circumcision (n = 5, 15.6%), excision with a split skin graft or a scrotal flap reconstruction (n = 5, 15.6%). Three (8.6%) patients presented with necrosis and required acute debridement. Overall, 18 patients had more than 1 procedure, and 8 patients required 3 or more procedures. A systematic search of the literature identified 887 articles of which 68 studies were included for analysis. The most common substance injected was paraffin (47.7%), followed by silicone (15.8%). The majority of patients (77.9%) presented with pain, swelling or penile deformity. 78.8% of the patients underwent surgical treatment, which included excision and primary closure with or without the use of skin grafts (85.1% of all procedures), the use of flaps (12.3%) and penile amputation (n = 2). Complications of foreign body injection into the male genitalia can be serious resulting in necrosis and autoamputation. Surgical intervention is often required to excise abnormal tissue to manage pain and improve cosmesis.

Which Dermal Filler is Better for Penile Augmentation for Aesthetic Purposes? A Prospective, Single-Surgeon Study Based on Real-World Experience

PURPOSE

Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection.

RESULTS

Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299).

CONCLUSIONS

The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

European Association of Urology Guidelines on Penile Size Abnormalities and Dysmorphophobia: Summary of the 2023 Guidelines

CONTEXT

Recommendations regarding the management of penile size abnormalities and dysmorphophobia are important in guiding evidence-based clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2023 European Association of Urology sexual and reproductive health evidence-based recommendations for the management of penile size abnormalities and dysmorphophobia.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A broad and comprehensive scoping exercise covering all areas of the guidelines was performed. Databases searched included Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Libraries. A level of evidence and a strength of recommendation were assigned for each recommendation according to the evidence identified. The evidence cutoff date for the 2023 guidelines is June 1, 2022.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Well-structured studies reporting high level of evidence, with standardized PROMS were deficient on penile size abnormalities and dysmorphohobia. A shared definition for short penis/micropenis was also lacking. Categorisation of penile abnormalities according to congenital, acquired, and dysmorphophobic aetiology is deemed compulsory. A detailed medical and psychosexual history and precise measurements of penile size are essential in the diagnostic pathway. Patients with normal penile size who are seeking penile augmentation should be referred for psychological evaluation for potential dysmorphophobic disorders. Penile length and girth enhancements can be achieved via a multitude of treatments, but a personalised management plan is crucial for satisfactory results. Endocrinological therapies, when indicated, are effective in the prepubertal setting only. Vacuum therapy has a limited evidence base in treatment protocols, although acceptable outcomes have been reported for penile traction therapy. Surgical techniques to enhance penile length and girth have limited evidence and should only be proposed after extensive patient counselling.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of penile abnormalities and dysmorphophobia is a complex issue with considerable ethical concerns. The adoption of a structured diagnostic and therapeutic pathway is crucial, as recommended in the guidelines.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Requests for medical/surgical treatments to increase penis size have increased dramatically worldwide. Several conservative and surgical treatments are available. However, few patients receive clear information on the benefits and possible harms of these treatments. These guidelines aim to provide a structured path to guide both physicians and patients in the selection of appropriate treatment(s) to increase penis size.

Multidisciplinary approach and management of patients who seek medical advice for penile size concerns: a narrative review

We aimed to provide an overview of the strategies available to manage patients concerned about their penile size and to provide useful surgical hints regarding the most common penile enlargement approaches, based on our surgical expertise in this field. A comprehensive research was carried out on MEDLINE/PubMed database to identify pertinent studies concerning penile enlargement issues. The search strategy included a range of keywords; e.g. penis, penile, enlargement, augmentation, lengthening, girth. Management of penile size-related concerns represents a real challenge for the urologist, especially when dealing with patients suffering from penile dysmorphophobic disorder (PDD). A multidisciplinary preoperative assessment, including a psychiatric/psychological evaluation, may help in discerning those patients who would benefit the most from counselling/conservative management from those who would benefit from surgery instead. Conservative approaches include the use of vacuum-based and penile-stretching devices, which have shown encouraging levels of efficacy and safety. Over the last decades, different surgical strategies have been developed, aimed at either increasing flaccid penile length or improving penile girth. Penile lengthening procedures are more established, and satisfactory results can be achieved by experienced, large referrals' volume, surgeons. To date, there is lack of consensus regarding the penile girth enhancing techniques, and therefore these should be regarded as experimental. A multidisciplinary approach is necessary to identify patients with PDD, who should not be offered surgical intervention and should be referred for psychiatric/psychological counselling instead. The surgical approach should be tailored to the subject's unique anatomy and underlying conditions.

Revelations on Men Who Seek Penile Augmentation Surgery: A Review

INTRODUCTION

Men with normal penis size sometimes mistakenly believe they have below average penile dimensions and often seek out treatment. Many men suffer from significant anxiety regarding this perceived defect. In this review, we evaluate the current literature of psychological, medical, and surgical treatment options for men with a complaint of a small penis.

OBJECTIVE

To review the current practice for treatment of men presenting for penile augmentation surgery.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted, using PubMed to identify current studies regarding penile enhancement. Search terms included "penile enhancement," "small penis anxiety," "small penis syndrome," "body dysmorphic disorder," and "penile augmentation."

RESULTS

The literature consistently reveals that men who seek out penile augmentation surgery usually have normal penile dimensions. There are limited published data on the practice of penile lengthening surgery or procedures to increase penile girth. New techniques have expanded on suspensory ligament release, such as tissue grafting and flaps. Structured psychological counseling continues to be the recommended initial standard of care for these men.

CONCLUSION

Many social forces have increased the perception among men that their penis size is inadequate. This increases anxiety and can lead to psychological disorders such as Penile Dysmorphic Disorder and Small Penis Syndrome. Men who undergo penile enhancement are often not satisfied with the results and may develop complications. Soubra A, Natale C, Brimley S, et al. Revelations on Men Who Seek Penile Augmentation Surgery: A Review. Sex Med Rev 2021;XX:XXX-XXX.

Collagen and the effect of poly-l-lactic acid based materials on its synthesis

Collagen is an important protein in various biological functions such as providing elasticity and waterproofing to the skin, structural stability to the cells in connective tissues (e.g. tendons, and bone) and stabilisation of atherosclerotic plaques. Collagen as a peptide with a peculiar triple helical structure is majorly composed of glycine and proline amino acids and is synthesised by fibroblasts via intracellular and extracellular mechanisms. Collagen plays an important role in wound healing, bone repair and plaque build-up during atherosclerosis. Various factors such as interleukins, insulin-like growth factor-I, nicotine, and glucose have been shown to influence collagen synthesis. This paper provides an overview of collagen structure, synthesis mechanisms, and the parameters that stimulate those mechanisms. Poly-l-lactic acid as a well-known biocompatible and biodegradable polymer has proved to stimulate collagen synthesis in various physical forms. As such, in this review special emphasis is laid on the effects of poly-l-lactic acid as well as its mechanism of action on collagen synthesis.

Penile girth enhancement procedures for aesthetic purposes

The present study aimed to describe and critically discuss the current evidence regarding the penile girth enhancement procedures for aesthetic purposes. We designed a narrative review of the literature. A comprehensive search in the MEDLINE database was performed. Original articles in English-language, published until March 2021, were selected. A total of 29 studies were included (3 reporting non-invasive approaches, 11 injection therapies, and 15 surgical procedures). The vast majority of articles (26, 89.7%) were not randomized controlled trials, with overall low quality and limited level of evidence. Only 1 (33.3%) paper regarding non-invasive approaches reported a minimal (+0.03 cm) but a significant increase of penile girth (p = 0.034). A low rate (11.2-14.4%) of mild, temporary adverse events and poor-to-moderate patient satisfaction were found. Eight (72.7%) articles concerning injection therapies showed a significant increase in penile girth (p < 0.05). A low rate of mild complications, generally at the injection site, and a high patient satisfaction rate (75-100%) were highlighted. Nine (60%) papers on surgical treatments found a significant increase in penile girth (p < 0.05), while the other 6 (40%) studies reported a generic improvement in penile circumference. Skin necrosis or ulcers, wound infections, or need for reoperation were reported in 8 (53.3%) studies. A high patient satisfaction rate (60-100%) was reported. Our review highlighted the overall positive results of injection procedures, the poor outcomes associated with non-invasive techniques, and the good efficacy and satisfaction with a non-negligible risk of complications in patients undergoing surgical treatments. However, the adverse events are probably largely under-reported and these procedures should still be considered under investigation due to the limited evidence available and the lack of guidelines.

Efficacy and Safety of Penile Girth Enhancement Using Hyaluronic Acid Filler and the Clinical Impact on Ejaculation: A Multi-Center, Patient/Evaluator-Blinded, Randomized Active-Controlled Trial

Purpose

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of penile girth enhancement (PGE) using hyaluronic acid (HA) filler with different physical properties from previous studies. Additionally, we evaluated the clinical impact on ejaculation after PGE.

Materials and Methods

This was a prospective, patient/evaluator-blinded, randomized, active-controlled, multicenter trial. Patients recruited between December 2017 and March 2018 were randomly assigned to the HA filler or control group (polylactic acid [PLA] filler). Penile girth, satisfaction level, Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP), and self-estimated intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT) were assessed at baseline and at 24 weeks post-injection.

Results

Sixty-four subjects (32 in each group) completed the trial. The mean increase in girth was 22.74±12.60 mm and 20.23±8.73 mm in the HA and control groups, respectively. Satisfaction level regarding penile appearance and sexual life significantly increased in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of increase in penile girth or change in satisfaction level. Both groups showed significant improvements in PEP index scores. Self-estimated IELT also significantly increased in the HA group (from 5.36±3.51 to 7.86±4.73 minutes, p=0.0001) and control group (from 5.23±3.55 to 6.43±4.22 minutes, p=0.021). No serious adverse events (AEs) were reported.

Conclusions

PGE with HA and PLA fillers resulted in significant enhancement of girth without serious AEs with no significant differences. Furthermore, PGE using filler improved clinical symptoms related to ejaculation.

Penile girth augmentation by injectable fillers: a comprehensive review of imaging features and inflammatory complications

Despite the extensive controversy and debate of penile girth augmentation, high demands for such procedures are increasing. Penile inflammation is not common sequel after penile filler augmentation, but when it occurs, it has serious complications that sometimes necessitate emergency surgical intervention. Imaging with a variety of modalities, including ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ascending urethrogrphy plays a paramount role in the detection and assessment of these conditions. Inflammatory conditions after penile girth augmentation using injectable fillers are ranging from local granuloma to penile abscess formation or diffuse cellulitis that may extend to the scrotum, perineum or deep pelvic organs. Rapid diagnosis and evaluation of extensions are important to avoid associated morbidity and permanent deformity. Our purpose is to provide a practical review of relevant penile anatomy, imaging appearance and injection technique of different types of subcutaneous fillers used in penile girth augmentation, and inflammatory complications that may occur after these procedures. Brief descriptions of patient clinical information and imaging features of inflammatory complications will be included and correlated in actual cases.

Nonsurgical Methods for Penile Augmentation: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

There is no standardized approach for nonsurgical techniques for penile augmentation despite the increase of demand for this intervention.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety between different injection techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

On October 8, 2019, a literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane database. All articles describing penile augmentation were included.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in this article with a total of 1,311 patients. Five studies were prospective cohort. The most commonly described technique was hyaluronic acid fillers with a total of 4 articles and 205 patients. The mean injected volume ranged from 20 to 40 mL. In all included studies, a minority of patients had side effects, but some had disabling complications.

CONCLUSION

There are no defined clinical guidelines for penile augmentation techniques implemented yet. Hyaluronic acid seems to be safe, efficient, and with a high satisfaction score. Further randomized control trials are warranted.

EBM LEVEL OF EVIDENCEBASED MEDICINE

2a.

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

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.

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

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.

Systematic Review of Surgical and Nonsurgical Interventions in Normal Men Complaining of Small Penis Size

INTRODUCTION

Evidence on penile enhancement interventions is lacking. Nonetheless, many non-evidence-based solutions are readily available.

AIM

To investigate enhancement and nonenhancement interventions in men without penile abnormalities seeking to increase penis size.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review with no time restrictions adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies with fewer than 10 cases or including men with organic penile pathologies or previous penile surgeries were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

When available, treatment efficacy was evaluated based on patient satisfaction, penile size increase, and complications.

RESULTS

We included 17 studies, assessing a total of 21 interventions in 1,192 men screened, with 773 followed up after nonsurgical (n = 248) or surgical (n = 525) treatment. The quality of the studies was poor in terms of methodology for patient selection and outcomes assessment. The vast majority of series reported normal penile size. Among nonsurgical treatments, extenders increased flaccid length (but by <2 cm), injectables increased girth but were associated with a high complication rate, and vacuum devices did not increase size. Surgical interventions included suspensory ligament incision (the most used method; n = 12), tissue grafting (autologous, n = 2; dermal fat, n = 3, ex vivo, n = 2), flaps (n = 2), and penile disassembly (n = 1). Some men reported a significant size increase; however, complications were not infrequent, and none of the techniques was externally validated. When provided, counseling was effective, with the majority of men coming to understand that their penis was normal and unwilling to undergo any further treatment.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of small penis in normal men is supported by scant, low-quality evidence. Structured counseling should be always performed, with extenders eventually used by those still seeking enhancement. Injectables and surgery should remain a last option, considered unethical outside of clinical trials. Marra G, Drury A, Tran L, et al. Systematic Review of Surgical and Nonsurgical Interventions in Normal Men Complaining of Small Penis Size. Sex Med Rev 2020;8:158-180.

A Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety Between Hyaluronic Acid and Polylactic Acid Filler Injection in Penile Augmentation: A Multicenter, Patient/Evaluator-Blinded, Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Studies about the clinical utility of fillers on penile augmentation (PA) are lacking. Furthermore, no randomized study has compared the utilities of fillers.

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety between hyaluronic acid (HA) and polylactic acid (PLA) filler injection for PA.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized patient/evaluator-blind, comparative multicenter study consisted of an initial 2-week baseline period and 48-week patient/evaluator-blind post-injection period. 72 patients with small penis syndrome were enrolled from 3 institutions between March-July 2016. Patients were divided into 2 groups: the HA group, comprising 36 patients injected with HA, and the PLA group, comprising 36 patients injected with PLA.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Penile girth and satisfaction were assessed at baseline and at 4, 12, 24, and 48 weeks after injection.

RESULTS

Penile girth increases adequately lasted ≤48 weeks in both groups (16.95 ± 10.53 and 13.49 ± 9.98 mm of mean increase in the HA and PLA groups, respectively; P < .001). The mean penile girth increase in the HA group was significantly greater than that in the PLA group at 4 weeks (P < .001). Subsequently, it gradually decreased and was no longer significantly different at 48 weeks (P = .075). Satisfaction levels increased after injection and were maintained ≤48 weeks. No significant differences were observed in the overall satisfaction level between the groups (P > .05). Filler injection-related adverse events were mild and transient and occurred in 1 and 3 patients in the HA and PLA groups, respectively.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

This study provides an overview of the efficacy and safety of HA and PLA fillers, which are the most commonly used soft tissue fillers for PA.

STRENGTH AND LIMITATIONS

This study, to our knowledge, is the first to compare the efficacy and safety between different filler injections for human PA. However, it was impossible to perform a researcher-blinded trial because of the unique properties of fillers, and 31 patients (43.1%) were dropped during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Both HA and PLA filler injections for PA led to a significant augmentative effect without serious adverse events and had clinically comparable efficacy and safety. Yang DY, Ko K, Lee SH, et al. A Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety Between Hyaluronic Acid and Polylactic Acid Filler Injection in Penile Augmentation: A Multicenter, Patient/Evaluator-Blinded, Randomized Trial. J Sex Med 2019;16:577-585.