Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Urology Reports
Published in: Current Urology Reports 4/2012

01-08-2012 | Erectile Dysfunction (DK Montague, Section Editor)

Congenital Penile Curvature: Update and Management

Authors: Iryna Makovey, Ty T. Higuchi, Drogo K. Montague, Kenneth W. Angermeier, Hadley M. Wood

Published in: Current Urology Reports | Issue 4/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Congenital penile curvature results from disproportionate development of the tunica albuginea of the corporal bodies and is not associated with urethral malformation. Patients usually present after reaching puberty as the curvature becomes more apparent with erections, and severe curvature can make intercourse difficult or impossible, at which point surgical repair is recommended. Excellent outcomes can be expected with surgical intervention. The three most commonly used repair techniques are the original Nesbit procedure, modified Nesbit procedure, and plication. Nesbit and modified Nesbit techniques require that an incision is made in the tunica albuginea while plication techniques utilize plicating sutures without an incision. While Nesbit and modified Nesbit techniques are more complex operations, these generally result in less recurrences and more satisfactory outcomes as opposed to the quicker and simpler plication technique.
Literature
1.
Nyirady P, Kelemen Z, Banfi G, et al. Management of congenital penile curvature. J Urol. 2008;179:1495–8.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Hsieh JT, Liu SP, Chen Y, et al. Correction of congenital penile curvature using modified tunical plication with absorbable sutures: the long-term outcome and patient satisfaction. Eur Urol. 2007;52:261–6.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Popken G, Wetterauer U, Schultze-Seemann W, et al. A modified corporoplasty for treating congenital penile curvature and reducing the incidence of palpable indurations. BJU Int. 1999;83:71–5.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Yachia D, Beyar M, Aridogan IA, et al. The incidence of congenital penile curvature. J Urol. 1993;150:1478–9.PubMed
5.
6.
Galen (c. 130–201 A.D.). In: Kuhn KC, editor. Claudii Galeni Opera Omnia, volume 10. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2011, p. 1001. First Published Leipzig, 1821–23.
7.
Cassar P. A medico-legal report of the Sixteenth Century from Malta. Med Hist. 1974;18:354–9.PubMed
8.
9.
Mettauet JP. Practical observation on those malformations on the male urethra and penis, termed hypospadias and epispadias with anaomalous case. Am J Med Sci. 1842;4:43.CrossRef
10.
Smith DR. Repair of hypospadias in the preschool child: a report of 150 cases. J Urol. 1967;97:723–30.PubMed
11.
12.
Hynes PJ, Fraher JP. The development of the male genitourinary system: III. The formation of the spongiose and glandar urethra. Br J Plast Surg. 2004;57:203–14.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Perriton CL, Powles N, Chiang C, et al. Sonic hedgehog signaling from the urethral epithelium controls external genital development. Dev Biol. 2002;247:26–46.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Baskin LS, Lee YT, Cunha GR. Neuroanatomical ontogeny of the human fetal penis. Br J Urol. 1997;79:628–40.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Cohn MJ. Development of the external genitalia: conserved and divergent mechanisms of appendage patterning. Dev Dyn. 2011;240:1108–15.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Devine Jr CJ. Horton CE: Chordee without hypospadias. J Urol. 1973;110:264–71.PubMed
17.
Kramer SA, Aydin G, Kelalis PP. Chordee without hypospadias in children. J Urol. 1982;128:559–61.PubMed
18.
Donnahoo KK, Cain MP, Pope JC, et al. Etiology, management and surgical complications of congenital chordee without hypospadias. J Urol. 1998;160:1120–2.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Devine Jr CJ, Blackley SK, Horton CE, et al. The surgical treatment of chordee without hypospadias in men. J Urol. 1991;146:325–9.PubMed
20.
Darewicz B, Kudelski J, Szynaka B, et al. Ultrastructure of the tunica albuginea in congenital penile curvature. J Urol. 2001;166:1766–8.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Adams MC, Chalian VS, Rink RC. Congenital dorsal penile curvature: a potential problem of the long phallus. J Urol. 1999;161:1304–7.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Catuogno C, Romano G. Androstanolone treatment for congenital penile curvature. Eur Urol. 2001;39 Suppl 2:28–32.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Kelami A. Congenital penile deviation and its treatment with the Nesbit-Kelami technique. Br J Urol. 1987;60:261–3.PubMedCrossRef
24.
• Basiri A, Sarhangnejad R, Ghahestani SM et al: Comparing absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures in corporeal plication for treatment of congenital penile curvature. Urol J 2011; 8: 302–6. The authors further described plication technique and proposed that using absorbable sutures can lead to similar outcomes with lower rates of palpable nodules or sutures with plication technique. PubMed
25.
26.
Cavallini G, Caracciolo S. Pilot study to determine improvements in subjective penile morphology and personal relationships following a Nesbit plication procedure for men with congenital penile curvature. Asian J Androl. 2008;10:512–9.PubMedCrossRef
27.
•• Leonardo C, De Nunzio C, Michetti P et al: Plication corporoplasty versus Nesbit operation for the correction of congenital penile curvature. A long-term follow-up. Int Urol Nephrol 2012; 44: 55–60. The authors compared the differences between the Nesbit or modified Nesbit repair and the plication repair in 31 patients with long-term follow-up and delineates specific complication rates and differences between the two techniques. This is one of the few papers to compare different techniques of repair and highlights the need for further larger studies to help better describe differences in outcomes. PubMedCrossRef
28.
Rajmil O, Arrus J, Fernandez M, et al. Sensory changes after surgical correction of penile curvature. Int J Impot Res. 2009;21:366–71.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Poulsen J, Kirkeby HJ. Treatment of penile curvature–a retrospective study of 175 patients operated with plication of the tunica albuginea or with the Nesbit procedure. Br J Urol. 1995;75:370–4.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Hsieh JT, Huang HE, Chen J, et al. Modified plication of the tunica albuginea in treating congenital penile curvature. BJU Int. 2001;88:236–40.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Paez A, Mejias J, Vallejo J, et al. Long-term patient satisfaction after surgical correction of penile curvature via tunical plication. Int Braz J Urol. 2007;33:502–7. discussion 507-9.PubMedCrossRef
32.
•• Tal R, Nabulsi O, Nelson CJ et al: The Psychosocial Impact of Penile Reconstructive Surgery for Congenital Penile Deviation. Journal of Sexual Medicine 2010; 7: 121–8. This is one of the few papers to address the psychological effects of congenital penile curvature and reconstructive surgery in a systematic and structured way. Specifics of the paper should be used in counseling patients regarding the upcoming surgery. Also it is a model and an incentive for further studies to help delineate outcomes of penile surgery. PubMedCrossRef
33.
Nesbit RM. Congenital curvature of the phallus: report of three cases with description of corrective operation. J Urol. 1965;93:230–2.PubMed
34.
Jardin A, Wagner G, Khoury S, et al. Erectile dysfunction. First International Consultation on Erectile Dysfunction. Paris, July 1-3, 1999. United Kingdom: Health Publications; 2000.
35.
Giammusso B, Burrello M, Branchina A, et al. Modified corporoplasty for ventral penile curvature: description of the technique and initial results. J Urol. 2004;171:1209–11.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Andrews HO, al-Akraa M, Pryor JP, et al. The Nesbit operation for congenital curvature of the penis. Int J Impot Res. 1999;11:119–22.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Rolle L, Tamagnone A, Timpano M, et al. The Nesbit operation for penile curvature: an easy and effective technical modification. J Urol. 2005;173:171–3. discussion 173-4.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Saalfeld J, Ehrlich RM, Gross JM, et al. Congenital curvature of the penis. Successful results with variations in corporoplasty. J Urol. 1973;109:64–5.PubMed
39.
Yachia D. Modified corporoplasty for the treatment of penile curvature. J Urol. 1990;143:80–2.PubMed
40.
Daitch JA, Angermeier KW, Montague DK. Modified corporoplasty for penile curvature: long-term results and patient satisfaction. J Urol. 1999;162:2006–9.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Ghanem H, Ghazy S, El-Meliegy A. Horizontal plication after vertical tunical incisions for the correction of congenital penile curvature. Int J Impot Res. 2000;12:117–9.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Ghanem H, Shamloul RM. Incisional corporoplasty for the correction of congenital penile curvature: a review of two suturing techniques. Int J Impot Res. 2008;20:222–5.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Sassine AM, Wespes E, Schulman CC. Modified corporoplasty for penile curvature: 10 years’ experience. Urology. 1994;44:419–21.PubMedCrossRef
44.
45.
Chien GW, Aboseif SR. Corporeal plication for the treatment of congenital penile curvature. J Urol. 2003;169:599–602.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Hauck EW, Bschleipfer T, Diemer T, et al. Long-term results of Essed-Schroeder plication by the use of non-absorbable Goretex sutures for correcting congenital penile curvature. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14:146–50.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Lee SS, Meng E, Chuang FP, et al. Congenital penile curvature: long-term results of operative treatment using the plication procedure. Asian J Androl. 2004;6:273–6.PubMed
48.
Nooter RI, Bosch JL, Schroder FH. Peyronie’s disease and congenital penile curvature: long-term results of operative treatment with the plication procedure. Br J Urol. 1994;74:497–500.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Schultheiss D, Meschi MR, Hagemann J, et al. Congenital and acquired penile deviation treated with the essed plication method. Eur Urol. 2000;38:167–71.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Van Der Horst C, Martinez Portillo FJ, Seif C, et al. Treatment of penile curvature with Essed-Schroder tunical plication: aspects of quality of life from the patients’ perspective. BJU Int. 2004;93:105–8.CrossRef
51.
Gholami SS, Lue TF. Correction of penile curvature using the 16-dot plication technique: a review of 132 patients. J Urol. 2002;167:2066–9.PubMedCrossRef
52.
53.
Baskin LS, Lue TF. The correction of congenital penile curvature in young men. Br J Urol. 1998;81:895–9.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Hsu GL. Hypothesis of human penile anatomy, erection hemodynamics and their clinical applications. Asian J Androl. 2006;8:225–34.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Greenfield JM, Lucas S, Levine LA. Factors affecting the loss of length associated with tunica albuginea plication for correction of penile curvature. J Urol. 2006;175:238–41.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Moriel EZ, Grinwald A, Rajfer J. Vein grafting of tunical incisions combined with contralateral plication in the treatment of penile curvature. Urology. 1994;43:697–701.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Ho KL, Yip AW, Leung LS, et al. Surgical treatment of penile curvature. Hong Kong Med J. 2006;12:410–4.PubMed
58.
Hatzichristou DG, Hatzimouratidis K, Apostolidis A, et al. Corporoplasty using tunica albuginea free grafts for penile curvature: surgical technique and long-term results. J Urol. 2002;167:1367–70.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Ritchey ML, Ribbeck M. Successful use of tunica vaginalis grafts for treatment of severe penile chordee in children. J Urol. 2003;170:1574–6. discussion 1576.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Simonato A, Gregori A, Ambruosi C, et al. Congenital penile curvature: dermal grafting procedure to prevent penile shortening in adults. Eur Urol. 2007;51:1420–7. discussion 1427-8.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Badawy H, Morsi H. Long-term followup of dermal grafts for repair of severe penile curvature. J Urol. 2008;180:1842–5.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Lentz AC, Carson 3rd CC. Peyronie’s surgery: graft choices and outcomes. Curr Urol Rep. 2009;10:460–7.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Congenital Penile Curvature: Update and Management
Authors
Iryna Makovey
Ty T. Higuchi
Drogo K. Montague
Kenneth W. Angermeier
Hadley M. Wood
Publication date
01-08-2012
Publisher
Current Science Inc.
Published in
Current Urology Reports / Issue 4/2012
Print ISSN: 1527-2737
Electronic ISSN: 1534-6285
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-012-0257-x

Other articles of this Issue 4/2012

Current Urology Reports 4/2012 Go to the issue

Erectile Dysfunction (DK Montague, Section Editor)

Stuttering Priapism: Insights into Pathogenesis and Management

Erectile Dysfunction (DK Montague, Section Editor)

The Challenge of Erectile Dysfunction in the Man with Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

Pediatric Urology (R Grady, Section Editor)

Varicocele in Adolescence: Where Are We Now?

Pediatric Urology (R Grady, Section Editor)

Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches to Kidney Stones in Children

Erectile Dysfunction (DK Montague, Section Editor)

Impact of Penile Size on Male Sexual Function and Role of Penile Augmentation Surgery

Erectile Dysfunction (DK Montague, Section editor)

Evaluation and Treatment of Adult Concealed Penis