(239) IS BUCCAL MUCOSA THE FUTURE OF PLAQUE INCISION/EXCISION AND GRAFTING FOR PEYRONIE’S DISEASE? A SINGLE-ARM META-ANALYSIS OF AN EMERGING GRAFT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Peyronie’s disease (PD) is a benign andrological condition that affects mens sexual health. Penile pain, plaques, and shaft curvatures leading to length loss and difficulties in sexual intromission are its hallmark clinical features. Although multiple surgical techniques have been explored in the management of PD, plaque incision/excision and grafting (PIG/PEG) has been described as a feasible option for more severe curvatures. Many graft materials have been explored for PIG/PEG. However, buccal mucosal grafts (BMG) have emerged as a popular, successful, and reliable choice. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates PIG/PEG with BMG as a surgical treatment for Peyronie's disease. The outcomes of interest explored were: 1) Penile curvature 2) Erectile function (IIEF-5), and 3) Stretched penile length (SPL). 4) Post-operative functional penile straightening (<20 degrees), and 5) De novo erectile dysfunction. Methods Multiple major databases were thoroughly searched, and all relevant literature, excluding systematic reviews, meta-analyses, case reports, and abstracts, were screened. The outcomes of interest described above were extracted from the eligible studies. Data collection and analysis were done in Microsoft Excel and R Studio, respectively. A proportions and mean differences meta-analysis was supplemented with heterogeneity and publication bias tests. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the eligible studies. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Ten publications were eligible for a systematic review, which encompassed data from 226 patients. The studies were mainly observational in design and published between 2005 and 2021 in three different languages (English, Chinese, and Russian). All studies demonstrated promising outcomes for PIG/PEG with BMG. A meta-analysis of mean differences demonstrated a peri-operative curvature reduction of -49.6 degrees (95% CI: -64.4 to -34.9, p < 0.01), IIEF-5 score improvement of 4.45 points (95% CI: -0.07 to 8.9, p =), and SPL preservation with an estimated mean difference of 1.41 cm (95% CI: 0.38 to 2.44, p < 0.01). Further proportional meta-analysis of functional penile straightening and de novo post-operative erectile dysfunction demonstrated pooled estimates of 92% and 7.5%, respectively. Heterogeneity was noted to be significant among the studies. Conclusions Buccal mucosa is a viable, effective, and safe graft option for PIG/PEG in managing PD. Overall, the available literature demonstrates promising results. Despite these positive outcomes, and given the fact that all available literature includes observational studies, there is a unanimous concurrence amongst the urological guideline panels and expert bodies such as the European Association of Urology (EAU), American Urological Association (AUA), Canadian Urological Association (CUA), and European Society for Sexual Medicine (ESSM) that randomized controlled trials are essential to further support these findings and define its benefits, risks and more importantly long-term outcomes. Disclosure No.
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 | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.041 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".