False fracture of the penis: Different pathology but similar clinical presentation and management

Improving clinical diagnostic accuracy and management of False penile fractures characterizing typical clinical presentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

False penile fractures (FPF) represent a rare sexual emergency characterized by blunt trauma of penis in the absence of albuginea's injury, with or without lesion of dorsal penile vein. Their presentation is often indistinguishable from true penile fractures (TPF). This overlapping of clinical presentation, and lack of knowledge about FPF, can lead surgeons often to proceed directly to surgical exploration without further examinations. The aim of this study was to define a typical presentation of false penile fractures (FPF) emergency, identifying in absence of "snap" sound, slow detumescence, penile shaft ecchymosis, and penile deviation main clinical signs.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis based on Medline, Scopus and Cochrane following a protocol designed a priori, to define sensitivity of "snap" sound absence, slow detumescence and penile deviation.

RESULTS

Based on the literature search of 93 articles, 15 were included (73 patients). All patients referred pain, most of them during coitus (n = 57; 78%). Detumescence occurred in 37/73 (51%), and all patients described detumescence occurrence as "slow". The results show that single anamnestic item have a high-moderate sensibility in the diagnosis of FPF, and the highest sensitive item was penile deviation (sensibility = 0.86). However, when more than one item is present, overall sensitivity increases greatly, closing to 100% (95% Confidence Interval 92-100).

CONCLUSION

Surgeons can consciously decide between additional exams, a conservative approach, and rapid intervention using these indicators to detect FPF. Our findings identified symptoms with excellent specificity for FPF diagnosis, giving clinicians more useful tools for making decisions.

Penile Fractures: Evaluation and Management

Penile fracture is a urologic injury with an etiology that varies based on the cultural milieu. Diagnosis can be made based on history and physical examination alone. Patients should be evaluated with RUG or cystoscopy when urethral injury is suspected. Ultrasound or MRI is a helpful adjunct when the diagnosis is unclear, and can assist in identifying the location of the rupture. Surgical management is favored over conservative measures to improve outcomes. Delayed surgical repair may not be inferior to immediate intervention.

Superficial Dorsal Venous Rupture of the Penis: False Penile Fracture That Needs to be Treated as a True Urologic Emergency

A 38-year-old man with history of repaired penile fracture presented with rapid detumescence, penile pain, and ecchymosis during vaginal sexual intercourse concerning for recurrent fracture. Surgical exploration revealed ruptured superficial dorsal vein of the penis, which was subsequently ligated. Patients with traumatic penile vascular injuries often present with clinical features indistinguishable from a true penile fracture. Gradual detumescence and an absence of characteristic popping sound may indicate a vascular injury but they cannot safely rule out a true penile fracture. Both true and false penile fractures require emergent surgical exploration and repair to prevent long-term complications.

A delayed foreskin-sparing approach to the management of penile fractures in uncircumcised Jamaican men

•

Suitable for uncircumcised men with a penile fracture without urethral injury.

•

An intentional delay of seven days is made before reassessment of the patient.

•

In true penile fractures a “rolling sign” at the fracture site is felt at day seven.

•

Focal incision over the fracture site under local anaesthesia is possible.

•

The delayed approach mitigates against negative surgical exploration.

Introduction

The traditional surgical approach to penile fracture is to perform a circumferential subcoronal degloving incision emergently to repair the injury. This approach necessitates circumcision to avoid foreskin complications. We present four men who had a delayed foreskin-sparing approach and discuss its advantages.

Presentation of case

Four of five uncircumcised patients who had suspected penile fractures secondary to coital injury, and without suspicion of concomitant urethral injury, had a delayed exploration, seven days after injury, utilizing an incision directly over the palpable haematoma, at the location of the tunical defect, thereby resulting in foreskin preservation. Two of 5 patients had repair under general anaesthesia, one under local anaesthesia and surgery was cancelled in another because upon reassessment at seven days he had normal erections and a normal penile examination. At follow up, all men had good functional and cosmetic outcomes.

Discussion

Uncircumcised patients with penile fractures, without suspicion of urethral injury, may undergo a delayed repair without prophylactic circumcision since there is minimal risk of foreskin complications. Delayed repair decreases the incidence of negative explorations by fostering a conservative approach in mimicking conditions such as superficial vein lacerations. It also enables the use of local anaesthesia in an elective ambulatory setting.

Conclusion

Delayed repair of penile fractures results in foreskin preservation, facilitates elective ambulatory care under local anaesthesia and decreases the incidence of negative surgical explorations.

Isolated penile urethral injury: A rare case following male coital trauma

Penile fractures are an uncommon urological emergency. Typically, penile fractures involve the corpus cavernosum and are sometimes associated with urethral injury. Isolated corpus spongiosum and urethral injuries without concomitant corpus cavernosum injury are, however, rare. With proper knowledge of the management of penile fractures and urethral injuries, this distinct entity can be diagnosed, assessed and managed successfully without complications.

Evaluation and Treatment of Penile Thrombophlebitis (Mondor's Disease)

Superficial penile thrombophlebitis or penile Mondor's disease (PMD) is an underreported condition that causes anxiety and embarrassment in affected men. Patients usually present with a smooth, cord-like induration on the dorsal penile shaft 1-7 days after prolonged or intensive sexual intercourse, but other presentations of disease and triggers for endothelial damage are possible. The condition is typically self-limited with expected spontaneous resolution within 4-8 weeks of initial presentation, and absolute diagnosis is usually not necessary with management including supportive care and pain control. However, when disease course is prolonged or there are concerning risk factors, it may be important to differentiate PMD from other conditions such as Peyronie's disease, hypercoagulability, blood stasis, genitourinary infection, and malignancy. History and physical are often sufficient to distinguish these conditions from PMD, but providers may employ ultrasound to assist with the diagnosis. If PMD does not spontaneously resolve, patients may be considered for thrombectomy, at which point histological analysis can confirm the diagnosis.