MP47-16 SAFETY OF NOVEL HYALURONIC ACID DERMAL FILLER INJECTIONS FOR PENILE GIRTH ENHANCEMENT
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Medical, Hormonal & Non-surgical Therapy I (MP47)1 May 2024MP47-16 SAFETY OF NOVEL HYALURONIC ACID DERMAL FILLER INJECTIONS FOR PENILE GIRTH ENHANCEMENT Amy M. Pearlman, Kristen Gumpf, William Moore, Jonathan Clavell, Jagan Kansal, Fenwa Milhouse, Kevin Zorn, Montreal Canada, and Alexander Tatem Amy M. PearlmanAmy M. Pearlman , Kristen GumpfKristen Gumpf , William MooreWilliam Moore , Jonathan ClavellJonathan Clavell , Jagan KansalJagan Kansal , Fenwa MilhouseFenwa Milhouse , Kevin ZornKevin Zorn , Montreal CanadaMontreal Canada , and Alexander TatemAlexander Tatem View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008880.11564.10.16AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Limited data exist regarding safety of penile girth enhancement treatments. Reported options for girth enhancement include injections of autologous fat, liquid silicone, hyaluronic acid (HA), or polymethyl-methacrylate, grafting with dermal fat, porcine dermal acellular matrix, or acellular collagen matrix, and surgical placement of a silicone implant. The purpose of our study was to retrospectively evaluate safety in a cohort of men undergoing standardized penile girth enhancement with HA dermal filler at a single site by reporting on post-procedure complications. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of men who underwent penile girth enhancement with HA dermal filler from August 2020 through April 2023. Peri-procedure adverse events were identified and reported using the Clavien-Dindo Classification system. RESULTS: 471 men underwent penile girth enhancement with HA dermal filler. All observed complications were minor (Clavien-Dindo grade 1-2 only). Two patients (0.42%) experienced injection site infections related to non-compliance post treatment with infection resolution after completing a course of oral antibiotic. One patient (0.21%) reported urinary tract infection symptoms shortly after HA dermal filler procedure, likely related to cutting his penis while shaving, and subsequently underwent additional filler injections without recurrence of urinary symptoms. One patient (0.21%) underwent reversal with hyaluronidase after his initial treatment. Three patients (0.63%) developed granulomas which were completely resolved with a single treatment of hyaluronidase. All three of these patients underwent additional HA injections without granuloma formation. Three patients (0.63%) experienced priapism treated without long term sequelae when intracavernosal injection (ICI) therapy was used for tumescence at time of filler injection. Once ICI was no longer used, no patients reported priapism. No patients reported erectile dysfunction or loss of sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that injection of HA dermal filler may be a safe option for men interested in penile girth enhancement. While rare complications may occur, our research suggests they are easily treatable in the outpatient setting without long term sequelae. Source of Funding: None © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e769 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Amy M. Pearlman More articles by this author Kristen Gumpf More articles by this author William Moore More articles by this author Jonathan Clavell More articles by this author Jagan Kansal More articles by this author Fenwa Milhouse More articles by this author Kevin Zorn More articles by this author Montreal Canada More articles by this author Alexander Tatem More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».