Sexual function outcomes following fracture of the penis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Fracture of the penis is a rare urological emergency which occurs as a result of abrupt trauma to an erect penis. There is paucity of data regarding long-term sexual function or erectile potency following fracture of the penis. The aim of this study is to objectively assess the overall sexual function following fracture of the penis. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 21 penile fractures was performed. A voluntary telephone questionnaire was performed to assess long term outcomes using three validated questionnaires-the Erection Hardness Grading Scale, the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and the Brief Male Sexual Function inventory (BMSFI). RESULTS: The mean age was 33.1 years (range: 19-63). The median follow up was 46 months (range: 3-144). All fractures were a result of sexual misadventure and all were surgically repaired. There were two concomitant urethral injuries. Seventeen patients were contactable. Fourteen patients demonstrated no evidence of erectile dysfunction (ED) (IIEF-5>22), 1 patient reported symptoms of mild ED (IIEF-5, 17-21) and one patient reported mild to moderate ED (IIEF-5, 12-16). No patients reported insufficient erection for penetration (EHGS: 1 or 2). Regarding the overall BMSFI, 13 (83%) patients were mostly satisfied or very satisfied with their sex life within the previous month. CONCLUSION: In a small surgical series of men with penile fracture managed within a short time frame from presentation, we demonstrate erectile potency is maintained. Long-term overall sexual satisfaction is promising.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".