Penile Replantation: A Retrospective Analysis of Outcomes and Complications

Abstract

Purpose Penile replantation is an uncommonly performed procedure, which can alleviate physical and psychosocial sequelae of penile amputation. This study critically appraises the current literature on penile replantation.

Methods A comprehensive literature search of the Medline, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases was conducted with multiple search terms related to penile replantation. Data on outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction were collected.

Results A total of 74 articles met inclusion criteria. One hundred and six patients underwent penile replantation, but outcome, complication, and satisfaction data were not standardized across all patients. Penile amputation most often resulted from self-mutilation or trauma. The majority were complete amputations (74.8%). Full sensation was maintained in 68.4% of patients. Most reported adequate urinary function (97.4%) and normal erection (77.5%). Skin necrosis (54.8%) and venous congestion (20.2%) were the most common complications. Urethral stricture (11.0%) and fistula (6.6%) were common urethral complications. Most (91.6%) patients reported overall satisfaction although there was a lack of patient-reported outcomes. Multivariate analysis suggested that complete amputation (β = 3.15, 95% CI 0.41–5.89, p = 0.024), anastomosis of the superficial dorsal artery (β = 9.88, 95% CI 0.74–19.02, p = 0.034), and increasing number of nerves coapted (β = 1.75, 95% CI 0.11–3.38, p = 0.036) were associated with favorable sexual, urinary, and sensation outcomes. Increasing number of vessels anastomosed (β = −3.74, 95% CI −7.15 to −0.32, p = 0.032) was associated with unfavorable outcomes.

Conclusion Although penile replantation is associated with complications, it has a high rate of satisfaction and efficacy. Coaptation of multiple nerves and anastomosis of the superficial dorsal artery should be completed.

Keywords

penis - penile replantation - microsurgery - outcomes - quality of life

^* Authors contributed equally to this work.

• References

• 1 Szasz G, McLoughlin MG, Warren RJ. Return of sexual functioning following penile replant surgery. Arch Sex Behav 1990; 19 (4) 343-348
• 2 Salgado CJ, Chim H, Tang JC, Monstrey SJ, Mardini S. Penile reconstruction. Semin Plast Surg 2011; 25 (3) 221-228
• 3 Sanford E, Acosta R, Rayhack J, Grzonka R, Persky L. Management of auto-emasculation in the psychotic state. J Urol 1991; 145 (3) 560-562
• 4 Khaireddine B, Adnen H, Khaled BM, Adel S. Surgical reimplantation of penile glans amputation in children during circumcision. Urol Ann 2014; 6 (1) 85-87
• 5 Ochoa B. Trauma of the external genitalia in children: amputation of the penis and emasculation. J Urol 1998; 160 (3 Pt 2): 1116-1119 , discussion 1137
• 6 Cohen BE, May Jr JW, Daly JS, Young HH. Successful clinical replantation of an amputated penis by microneurovascular repair. Case report. Plast Reconstr Surg 1977; 59 (2) 276-280
• 7 Heymann AD, Bell-Thompson J, Rathod DM, Heller LE. Successful reimplantation of the penis using microvascular techniques. J Urol 1977; 118 (5) 879-880
• 8 Izzidien AY. Successful replantation of a traumatically amputated penis in a neonate. J Pediatr Surg 1981; 16 (2) 202-203
• 9 Yamano Y, Tanaka H. Replantation of a completely amputated penis by the microsurgical technique: a case report. Microsurgery 1984; 5 (1) 40-43
• 10 Borenstein A, Yaffe B, Seidman DS, Kaplan HY, Tsur H. Successful microvascular replantation of an amputated penis. Isr J Med Sci 1991; 27 (7) 395-398
• 11 Ishida O, Ikuta Y, Shirane T, Nakahara M. Penile replantation after self-inflicted complete amputation: case report. J Reconstr Microsurg 1996; 12 (1) 23-26
• 12 Nejedlý A, Tvrdek M, Bodianová K, Urban M. Penile replantation—a case report. Acta Chir Plast 1998; 40 (3) 65-67
• 13 Engelman ER, Polito G, Perley J, Bruffy J, Martin DC. Traumatic amputation of the penis. J Urol 1974; 112 (6) 774-778
• 14 Einarsson G, Goldstein M, Laungani G. Penile replantation. Urology 1983; 22 (4) 404-405
• 15 Carroll PR, Lue TF, Schmidt RA, Trengrove-Jones G, McAninch JW. Penile replantation: current concepts. J Urol 1985; 133 (2) 281-285
• 16 Tamai S, Nakamura Y, Motomiya Y. Microsurgical replantation of a completely amputated penis and scrotum: case report. Plast Reconstr Surg 1977; 60 (2) 287-291
• 17 Wei FC, McKee NH, Huerta FJ, Robinette MA. Microsurgical replantation of a completely amputated penis. Ann Plast Surg 1983; 10 (4) 317-321
• 18 Darewicz B, Galek L, Darewicz J, Kudelski J, Malczyk E. Successful microsurgical replantation of an amputated penis. Int Urol Nephrol 2001; 33 (2) 385-386
• 19 Fuller A, Bolt J, Carney B. Successful microsurgical penile replantation after a workplace injury. Urol Int 2007; 78 (1) 10-12
• 20 Riyach O, El Majdoub A, Tazi MF , et al. Successful replantation of an amputated penis: a case report and review of the literature. J Med Case Reports 2014; 8: 125
• 21 Ozturk A, Kilinc M, Guven S , et al. Penis replantation after self-mutilation. Int Urol Nephrol 2009; 41 (1) 109-111
• 22 Mendez R, Kiely WF, Morrow JW. Self-emasculation. J Urol 1972; 107 (6) 981-985
• 23 Babaei AR, Safarinejad MR. Penile replantation, science or myth? A systematic review. Urol J 2007; 4 (2) 62-65
• 24 Sammer DM. Management of complications with flap procedures and replantation. Hand Clin 2015; 31 (2) 339-344
• 25 Jung SW, Lee J, Oh SJ, Koh SH, Chung CH, Lee JW. A review of microvascular ear replantation. J Reconstr Microsurg 2013; 29 (3) 181-188
• 26 Tuffaha SH, Sacks JM, Shores JT , et al. Using the dorsal, cavernosal, and external pudendal arteries for penile transplantation: technical considerations and perfusion territories. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 134 (1) 111e-119e
• 27 Biswas G. Technical considerations and outcomes in penile replantation. Semin Plast Surg 2013; 27 (4) 205-210