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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |