Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · European J Pediatr Surg Rep. 2020; 08(01): e77-e80
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1716525
Case Report

A Case Series of Penile Skin Grafting in Children

Lin Qiu
1   Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
,
Xuan Zhang
2   Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Development and Disorders, Key Laboratory of Pediatrics in Chongqing (CSTC2009CA5002), Chongqing International Science and Technology Cooperation Center for Child Development and Disorders, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
,
Yan Liu
1   Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
,
Yuexian Fu
1   Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
,
Xingang Yuan
1   Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Pediatric penile skin grafting is rarely performed. We present a case series of four pediatric patients receiving skin grafting due to the loss of penile skin. The four boys were followed up for 1 to 5 years. One full-thickness skin graft and three split-thickness skin grafts (STSGs) survived well with low Vancouver scar scale scores. One boy gradually developed lymphedema of the distal foreskin and underwent a second preputioplasty. He presented with normal erectile function and did not experience any pain. We propose thick STSGs as the most appropriate choice for pediatric penile skin reconstruction. Lymphedema of the foreskin is an important long-term complication of penile skin grafting.

Keywords

pediatric - penis - skin grafts - lymphedema

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 05 February 2020

Accepted: 04 July 2020

Article published online:
21 October 2020

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Stuttgart · New York

 

  • References

  • 1 Triana Junco P, Dore M, Nuñez Cerezo V. et al. Penile reconstruction with skin grafts and dermal matrices: indications and management. European J Pediatr Surg Rep 2017; 5 (01) e47-e50
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 McAninch JW. Management of genital skin loss. Urol Clin North Am 1989; 16 (02) 387-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Manzoni G, Bracka A, Palminteri E, Marrocco G. Hypospadias surgery: when, what and by whom?. BJU Int 2004; 94 (08) 1188-1195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Patino G, Zheng MY, Breyer BN, Cohen AJ. Skin grafting applications in urology. Rev Urol 2019; 21 (01) 8-14
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Fam MM, Hanna MK. Resurfacing the penis of complex hypospadias repair (‘Hypospadias Cripples’). J Urol 2017; 197 (3 Pt 2): 859-864
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Thakar HJ, Dugi III DD. Skin grafting of the penis. Urol Clin North Am 2013; 40 (03) 439-448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Asimakopoulos AD, Iorio B, Vespasiani G, Cervelli V, Spera E. Autologous split-thickness skin graft for penile coverage in the treatment of buried (trapped) penis after radical circumcision. BJU Int 2012; 110 (04) 602-606
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Rybak J, Larsen S, Yu M, Levine LA. Single center outcomes after reconstructive surgical correction of adult acquired buried penis: measurements of erectile function, depression, and quality of life. J Sex Med 2014; 11 (04) 1086-1091
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Black PC, Friedrich JB, Engrav LH, Wessells H. Meshed unexpanded split-thickness skin grafting for reconstruction of penile skin loss. J Urol 2004; 172 (03) 976-979
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Gillett MD, Rathbun SR, Husmann DA, Clay RP, Kramer SA. Split-thickness skin graft for the management of concealed penis. J Urol 2005; 173 (02) 579-582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Corps BV. The effect of graft thickness, donor site and graft bed on graft shrinkage in the hooded rat. Br J Plast Surg 1969; 22 (02) 125-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Garaffa G, Christopher N, Ralph DJ. The management of genital lymphoedema. BJU Int 2008; 102 (04) 480-484
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Alwaal A, McAninch JW, Harris CR, Breyer BN. Utilities of split-thickness skin grafting for male genital reconstruction. Urology 2015; 86 (04) 835-839
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Chertin B, Kocherov S, Binenboym R. et al. Fenestrated sheet split-thickness skin grafting for reconstruction of penile skin loss in pediatric population. J Pediatr Surg 2016; 51 (08) 1362-1365
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Diaz EC, Corcoran JF, Johnson EK. Pediatric penile reconstruction using autologous split-thickness skin graft. J Pediatr Urol 2016; 12 (03) 185-186
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar