A SURGICAL ALGORITHM FOR THE TREATMENT OF PEYRONIE'S DISEASE
Abstract
Purpose When conservative treatment of Peyronie's disease fails, the optimal surgical approach is not well defined. Multiple factors, including penile rigidity, degree of curvature, shaft narrowing with hinge effect and erectile response to vasoactive penile injections, indicate that no single approach is likely to solve the problem in all patients. Materials and methods A surgical algorithm was developed for the treatment of Peyronie's Disease based on our previous surgical experience, which was used prospectively in 103 consecutive men. Penile straightening without prosthesis was offered to patients with adequate rigidity for coitus. Specifically, for mild to moderate curvature less than 60 degrees without hourglass or hinge effect deformity the less complicated tunica albuginea plication procedure was performed. For those men with more severe, complex curvature greater than 60 degrees and/or significant hourglass or hinge effect deformity plaque incision or partial excision with dermal grafting was offered to limit shaft shortening and to reconstruct a shaft with normal caliber to provide optimal axial support during intromission. For men with poor sexually induced erections and/or inadequate response to intracavernosal pharmacotherapy penile prosthesis placement was recommended to provide adequate straightening and rigidity. Results Of 22 patients who underwent plication procedures 91% remained potent and the penis remained straight postoperatively. Of 52 patients who und…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Since 2013, multiple clinical studies have shown similarly favorable results for collagenase clostridium histolyticum.
“Since that time, multiple clinical studies have shown similarly favorable results.”
From Comparing and Contrasting Peyronie's Disease Guidelines: Points of Consensus and Deviation. (2021) · cites this paper as [39]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 15 · Cited by 209
- Authors
- Levine, L. A., & Lenting, E. L.
- Affiliations
- Rush University Medical Center (US)
- ORCID
- Levine, Laurence A.
- Venue
- Journal of Urology
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 158
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2149-2152
- ISSN
- 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-3792
- OpenAlex
- W2081503670
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 2.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Urology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urological Disorders and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Dupuytren's Contracture and Treatments
- Keywords
- Peyronie's disease, penile curvature, surgical algorithm, tunica albuginea plication, penile prosthesis, erectile function, penile deformity
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Algorithms, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Penile Induration, Prospective Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review