This article appeared in the British Journal of Urology, (14 July 2009), and reviews the experience of one urologist, Allen F Morey, who performed 48 corrective PD surgical procedures over a 4 year period (2005-2009). Of these men, 34 had detailed penile measurements. Three of these men were diagnosed with congenital penile curvature (cpc), the remainder were PD patients. Dr. Morey is on the staff of the University of Texas Southwestern, Department of Urology, Dallas, Texas and has impressive credentials.
First some definitions:
plication - state of being folded or tucked
degloving - is a tearing away in which an extensive section of the skin is completely torn from the underlying tissue
imbrication - surgical pleating and folding of tissue to provide extra support
The article points out that the majority of other urologists who perform corrective surgery for PD or CPC use one of 2 procedures; either a 1) plication procedure (imbrication alone without grafting) for deformities under 60 degrees using a circumsing, degloving incision or 2) excision with a grafting procedure for deformities + 60 degrees. In contrast, Dr. Morey and his team at the University of Texas use a minimally invasive approach, penoscrotal plication (PSP) with a small penoscrotal incision even for complex deformities. In the authors' opinion, it is simple, safe and effective. This procedure is considered most effective for a dorsal curvature, the curvature seen in the majority of men with PD.
This surgical procedure takes approximately 1 hour and is considered complete when all members of the surgical team agree that the curvature has been completely corrected. Patients are released immediately after surgery and most are able to return to work promptly. They were instructed to return for a follow up in 4-6 weeks and barring any problems that was it. The median range of curvature prior to surgery was 45 degrees (20-80) and after surgery was 15 degrees (0-25). (Note that curvatures in excess of 30 degrees are when it usually interferes with intercourse). Complications were rare and minor. Three men had erectile pain at + 6 weeks after surgery and one of those 3 men required suture release for pain relief. This man had cpc and not PD. Another man reported worsening of his condition and eventually had a prosthesis inserted.
The authors go on to discuss the adverse effects of standard corrective surgery. Briefly, there are high rates of ED, lack of rigidity and penile shortening. None of the patients who underwent their minimally invasive technique reported penile shorting. The authors state that their procedure and findings "debunk" several myths about surgical correction of PD curvature; it results in shortening, severe curvatures are not corrected by this surgery, penile skin must be degloved in order for plication. They conclude that their procedure is a safe and effective technique that is widely applicable for reconstructing penile curvature.
As noted in many articles about our condition, there is no standard treatment for surgical correction of PD curvature and it seems urologists use whatever treatment method they are most familiar with.
Fortunately, I have good insurance and can afford to travel for medical treatment. I have seen a number of prominent name urologists who specialize in PD and it has been recommended to me that plication with degloving would be appropriate, another suggested grafting and a 3rd said that any procedure would have to be modified for my condition.
The authors of the British Journal of Urology article, conclude that their minimally invasive procedure described above appears to be a more effective, safer approach to correction of penile curvature that the others commonly used. I have one reservation about this article. The authors state that their patients did not complain of penile shortening. As I noted previously as is the usual case for all articles, there is no mention of girth, either pre and post surgical.