Evaluation of Z-plasty versus Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age group
Abstract Background The penoscrotal web may be congenital or acquired following excessive ventral skin removal during circumcision. Several surgical techniques were described for the treatment of congenital webbed penis without a clear comparison between their outcomes. This prospective study aimed...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2024-03-01
|
| Series: | BMC Urology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01450-7 |
| _version_ | 1797246993127440384 |
|---|---|
| author | Ahmed Elrouby |
| author_facet | Ahmed Elrouby |
| author_sort | Ahmed Elrouby |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The penoscrotal web may be congenital or acquired following excessive ventral skin removal during circumcision. Several surgical techniques were described for the treatment of congenital webbed penis without a clear comparison between their outcomes. This prospective study aimed at comparing the surgical results of Z-scrotoplasty and Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the treatment of congenital webbed penis in uncircumcised pediatric patients. Methods Our study included 40 uncircumcised patients who were divided randomly into two groups; Group A included 20 patients who were treated by Z-scrotoplasty and Group B included the other 20 patients who were treated by Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty. All patients were circumcised at the end of the procedure. Results The surgical outcome was good without a significant difference between the two groups in 36 patients. Recurrent webbing developed in one patient of Group A and in three patients of Group B (FE p = 0.605) The only significant difference between the two groups was the operative duration which was shorter in Group B than in Group A (P < 0.001*). Conclusions Treatment of congenital penoscrotal web in the pediatric age group could be done with either Z-scrotoplasty or Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty with satisfactory results, however, without significant difference in the surgical outcomes. Trial registration • Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05817760. • Registration release date: April 5, 2023. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T19:51:37Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-58c51e35505545268e0cc81a72c89476 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2490 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T19:51:37Z |
| publishDate | 2024-03-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Urology |
| spelling | doaj.art-58c51e35505545268e0cc81a72c894762024-03-24T12:35:02ZengBMCBMC Urology1471-24902024-03-012411710.1186/s12894-024-01450-7Evaluation of Z-plasty versus Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age groupAhmed Elrouby0Department of Pediatric Surgery, Elshatby University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria UniversityAbstract Background The penoscrotal web may be congenital or acquired following excessive ventral skin removal during circumcision. Several surgical techniques were described for the treatment of congenital webbed penis without a clear comparison between their outcomes. This prospective study aimed at comparing the surgical results of Z-scrotoplasty and Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the treatment of congenital webbed penis in uncircumcised pediatric patients. Methods Our study included 40 uncircumcised patients who were divided randomly into two groups; Group A included 20 patients who were treated by Z-scrotoplasty and Group B included the other 20 patients who were treated by Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty. All patients were circumcised at the end of the procedure. Results The surgical outcome was good without a significant difference between the two groups in 36 patients. Recurrent webbing developed in one patient of Group A and in three patients of Group B (FE p = 0.605) The only significant difference between the two groups was the operative duration which was shorter in Group B than in Group A (P < 0.001*). Conclusions Treatment of congenital penoscrotal web in the pediatric age group could be done with either Z-scrotoplasty or Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty with satisfactory results, however, without significant difference in the surgical outcomes. Trial registration • Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05817760. • Registration release date: April 5, 2023.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01450-7Penoscrotal webZ-scrotoplastyHeineke-MikuliczScrotoplasty |
| spellingShingle | Ahmed Elrouby Evaluation of Z-plasty versus Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age group BMC Urology Penoscrotal web Z-scrotoplasty Heineke-Mikulicz Scrotoplasty |
| title | Evaluation of Z-plasty versus Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age group |
| title_full | Evaluation of Z-plasty versus Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age group |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation of Z-plasty versus Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age group |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Z-plasty versus Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age group |
| title_short | Evaluation of Z-plasty versus Heineke-Mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age group |
| title_sort | evaluation of z plasty versus heineke mikulicz scrotoplasty in the management of penoscrotal web in pediatric age group |
| topic | Penoscrotal web Z-scrotoplasty Heineke-Mikulicz Scrotoplasty |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01450-7 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ahmedelrouby evaluationofzplastyversusheinekemikuliczscrotoplastyinthemanagementofpenoscrotalwebinpediatricagegroup |