Procedures used for correction of isolated penile torsion: are they competitive or complementary?
To report our experience in starting the correction of penile torsion, whatever its degree (moderate or severe) with one or more simple procedures either separately or complementary in the same session.
Patients and methods
Between 2013 and 2018, 62 patients who have significant isolated penile torsion (> 45°) were involved in this study. Those patients were subjected to either simple degloving with skin reposition, degloving with skin overcorrection and/or dartos flap procedures. Those procedures were performed either separately or complementarily. All patients were examined postoperatively after 7 days and followed up at 3, 6, and 9 months postoperatively.
37 out of 62 patients had a moderate degree (45–90) of penile torsion; 21 of them were corrected using skin degloving–reattachment technique, 11 patients were corrected by degloving with skin overcorrection, and in the remaining 4 patients dartos flap technique was used for correction. In 25/62 patients who had severe degree (> 90°) of torsion; 9 patients were managed by degloving with skin overcorrection, while in 13 patients the procedure was shifted to dartos flap technique, and the remaining 3 patients, 2 of whom had 180° torsion, were managed by dartos flap with added skin overcorrection.
Performing degloving and skin reattachment with or without skin overcorrection procedure and dartos flap procedure either separately or complementarily in the same patient whatever the degree of torsion (moderate or severe) is associated with good results and can protect some patients from exposure to more difficult and extensive procedures as corporopexy and corporeal plication.
KeywordsPenile torsion Degloving Dartos flap Corporopexy
HMEl-D and MEAl-D: protocol development, data collection data analysis, manuscript writing. MSK, MEE and SAN: data collection. MRT: manuscript editing.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Research involving human participant and/or animals
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee. Approval was obtained from the local ethics committee of the Tanta University, Egypt, No. 345/2.
Informed consent was signed by the parents of each patient involved in this study.
- 7.Azmy A, Eckstein HB (1981) Surgical correction of torsion of the penis. Br J Urol 53:378–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1981.tb03202.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Bhat A, Bhat M, Kumar V, Goyal S, Bhat AK, Patni M (2017) The incidence of isolated penile torsion in North India. J Pediatr Urol 13(491):e1–491.e6Google Scholar
- 14.Abou Zeid AA, Soliman H (2010) Penile torsion: an overlooked anomaly with distal hypospadias. Ann Pediatr Surg 6:93–97Google Scholar
- 19.Elder JS (2007) Anomalies of the genitalia in boys and their surgical management. In: Wein AJ, Kavoussi LR, Novick AC et al (eds) Campbell-Walsh urology, 9th edn. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 3754–3760Google Scholar
- 20.Zeid AAA, Soliman H (2010) Penile torsion: an overlooked anomaly with distal hypospadias. Ann Pediatr Surg 6(2):93–97Google Scholar