Cargando…

Successful Second Microsurgical Replantation for Amputated Penis

Penile amputation is a rare emergency, but the best method for its repair is required due to the organ’s functional and societal role. Since the first successful microsurgical replantation of the amputated penis, microsurgical techniques have matured and become the standard treatment for the penile...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fujiki, Masahide, Ozaki, Mine, Kai, Akiko, Takushima, Akihiko, Harii, Kiyonori
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5640378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29062672
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001512
_version_ 1783271032104157184
author Fujiki, Masahide
Ozaki, Mine
Kai, Akiko
Takushima, Akihiko
Harii, Kiyonori
author_facet Fujiki, Masahide
Ozaki, Mine
Kai, Akiko
Takushima, Akihiko
Harii, Kiyonori
author_sort Fujiki, Masahide
collection PubMed
description Penile amputation is a rare emergency, but the best method for its repair is required due to the organ’s functional and societal role. Since the first successful microsurgical replantation of the amputated penis, microsurgical techniques have matured and become the standard treatment for the penile replantation. However, the successful second microsurgical replantation for amputated penis has been rarely reported. We present the case of a 40-year-old man with schizophrenia who had a past history of penile self-mutilation and successful replantation at another hospital 2 years ago. After stopping oral medication for schizophrenia, he again cut his penis with a kitchen knife. We successfully replanted the amputated penis by anastomosing both circumflex arteries, the superficial dorsal vein, and the deep dorsal vein using microsurgical techniques. Postoperatively, the foreskin of the replanted penis gradually developed partial necrosis, requiring surgical debridement. The aesthetic and functional results were satisfactory and retrograde urethrography showed no evidence of leakage and stricture of the urethra. Although skin necrosis after penile replantation has been reported as an unavoidable process owing to the nature of injury, the rate would be higher after secondary replantation because of scar formation due to the previous operation. Therefore, our case of successful secondary replantation suggests that skin necrosis would be a predictable postoperative complication and the debridement timing of the devitalized foreskin should be closely monitored, and also secondary amputation is not a contraindication of replantation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5640378
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56403782017-10-23 Successful Second Microsurgical Replantation for Amputated Penis Fujiki, Masahide Ozaki, Mine Kai, Akiko Takushima, Akihiko Harii, Kiyonori Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Case Report Penile amputation is a rare emergency, but the best method for its repair is required due to the organ’s functional and societal role. Since the first successful microsurgical replantation of the amputated penis, microsurgical techniques have matured and become the standard treatment for the penile replantation. However, the successful second microsurgical replantation for amputated penis has been rarely reported. We present the case of a 40-year-old man with schizophrenia who had a past history of penile self-mutilation and successful replantation at another hospital 2 years ago. After stopping oral medication for schizophrenia, he again cut his penis with a kitchen knife. We successfully replanted the amputated penis by anastomosing both circumflex arteries, the superficial dorsal vein, and the deep dorsal vein using microsurgical techniques. Postoperatively, the foreskin of the replanted penis gradually developed partial necrosis, requiring surgical debridement. The aesthetic and functional results were satisfactory and retrograde urethrography showed no evidence of leakage and stricture of the urethra. Although skin necrosis after penile replantation has been reported as an unavoidable process owing to the nature of injury, the rate would be higher after secondary replantation because of scar formation due to the previous operation. Therefore, our case of successful secondary replantation suggests that skin necrosis would be a predictable postoperative complication and the debridement timing of the devitalized foreskin should be closely monitored, and also secondary amputation is not a contraindication of replantation. Wolters Kluwer Health 2017-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5640378/ /pubmed/29062672 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001512 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Case Report
Fujiki, Masahide
Ozaki, Mine
Kai, Akiko
Takushima, Akihiko
Harii, Kiyonori
Successful Second Microsurgical Replantation for Amputated Penis
title Successful Second Microsurgical Replantation for Amputated Penis
title_full Successful Second Microsurgical Replantation for Amputated Penis
title_fullStr Successful Second Microsurgical Replantation for Amputated Penis
title_full_unstemmed Successful Second Microsurgical Replantation for Amputated Penis
title_short Successful Second Microsurgical Replantation for Amputated Penis
title_sort successful second microsurgical replantation for amputated penis
topic Case Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5640378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29062672
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001512
work_keys_str_mv AT fujikimasahide successfulsecondmicrosurgicalreplantationforamputatedpenis
AT ozakimine successfulsecondmicrosurgicalreplantationforamputatedpenis
AT kaiakiko successfulsecondmicrosurgicalreplantationforamputatedpenis
AT takushimaakihiko successfulsecondmicrosurgicalreplantationforamputatedpenis
AT hariikiyonori successfulsecondmicrosurgicalreplantationforamputatedpenis