Aesthetic Augmentation Phalloplasty: A Systematic Review of Techniques and Outcomes.
Level 4 - case-series / case-control
systematic review of poor-quality observational studies and case series without randomized trials
PubMed 33136942 · doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000007249
What was done
A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines searched MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases (1990–2018) for studies evaluating aesthetic augmentation phalloplasty in cisgender men with normal penile anatomy. Data were collected on outcomes, surgical techniques (suspensory ligament incision, grafting, flaps, penile disassembly), complications, and patient-reported satisfaction.
What was found
Across 16 studies involving 1,192 patients (mean age 23–44 years, follow-up 6–48 months), 70.6% underwent girth augmentation only, 16% length augmentation only, and 13.4% combined augmentation. Flaccid length gain ranged from 8% to 83% and erect length gain from 12% to 53%. Flaccid girth gain ranged from 16% to 56% and erect girth gain from 19% to 30%. The pooled complication rate was 14.6%, highest in combined procedures. Patient satisfaction ranged from 50% to 100%.
Why it matters
This review synthesizes evidence on investigational penile enhancement techniques, demonstrating that reported dimensional gains and patient satisfaction must be weighed against a substantial complication rate.
Limits
The primary studies were of poor methodological quality with inconsistent patient selection and outcome reporting. Follow-up ranged widely (6 to 48 months), measurement methods were non-standardized, and no randomized controlled data were available.
Cited by
- supports Penile lengthening surgeries have very high complication rates.