Three-dimensional mapping and comparative analysis of the distal human corpus cavernosum and the inflatable penile prosthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intricate anatomy of the corpus cavernosum in both the flaccid and tumescent state has not been fully elucidated. We report our experience using a three-dimensional (3D) scanner to reconstruct cadaveric casts and compare them with 3D images of two prototypes of penile prosthesis. Two different models of the Titan Coloplast inflatable penile prosthesis were analyzed using a 3D scanner. The first was the standard model and the second was a newer model with a rounder silicone tip. Two cadaveric phalluses were harvested using Smooth-Cast 300Q polyurethane molding. The molds were excised and scanned along side the penile prosthesis. 3D scans were completed and analyzed using Leios Mesh software, and GOM Inspect software. The 3D scans demonstrated the mean human corporal radii 2 mm from the distal tip to be 36.51 mm (36.01-37.0 mm), which is an obtuse angle. The standard Titan penile prosthesis spherical radius at the same level was 202.52 mm, while the new silicone tip prosthesis had a radius of 139.33 mm. 3D mapping further demonstrated the trajectory of the cavernosa appeared curvilinear and the distal ends appeared blunt. The use of cadaveric cavernosal molds in combination with the 3D scanner allowed us to accurately image the corpus cavernosum for the first time. Our findings suggest that anatomically accurate corporal tips appear to be relatively blunt and that the new Titan silicone tip penile prosthesis more closely resembles the human corporal tip.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".