Anatomical Study of the Penile Suspensory System: A Surgical Application to Micropenis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penile enlargement surgery is the second most desired cosmetic procedure in men worldwide. The mainstay of penile lengthening procedures is a partial release of the penile suspensory ligament system. Concerns regarding erect penis stability after this procedure have been raised by the surgical community. This study describes the anatomical features of the penile suspensory ligament system and explores the stability mechanisms of the penis. Methods: This study is subdivided in two parts: an anatomical analysis and a clinical analysis. The anatomical part consists of a dissection of eight male cadavers to describe the anatomy and test the stability after sectioning successively the suspensory ligaments. The clinical part consists of an analysis of 30 patients with micropenis operated on for penile lengthening by a penile suspensory ligament release and lipofilling. Results: The suspensory apparatus consists of four distinct ligamentous structures: fundiform, suspensory, dense vertical, and arcuate ligaments. These different structures are lax superficially but become firm and tense posteriorly. The section of the fundiform and suspensory ligaments did not destabilize the penis. Conclusion: Penile lengthening by way of cautious suspensory ligament release can be performed without erection instability.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it