
==== Front
Aesthetic Plast Surg
Aesthetic Plast Surg
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
0364-216X
1432-5241
Springer US New York

38286899
3837
10.1007/s00266-023-03837-7
Original Articles
Morphometric Predictors of Penile Length Increase After Division of its Suspensory Ligament
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2075-6625
Ramos Márcio marcioramos026@gmail.com

12
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2822-5650
Varanda Pereira Alice 13
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8977-3768
Silva Leonardo 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9965-1326
Inácio Ana Rita 14
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4473-4076
Álvares Furtado Ivo 15
1 grid.9983.b 0000 0001 2181 4263 Lisbon Faculty of Medicine, Lisbon, Portugal
2 Local Health Unit of Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
3 LMR Plastic Surgery, Lisbon, Portugal
4 grid.435177.3 0000 0004 0632 8410 National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, Lisbon, Portugal
5 https://ror.org/0442zbe52 grid.26793.39 0000 0001 2155 1272 Department of Medicine (Anatomy), Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Madeira, Funchal, Portugal
29 1 2024
29 1 2024
2024
48 8 16351643
3 8 2023
22 12 2023
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Introduction

Division of the suspensory ligament of the penis has emerged as a popular surgical approach for penile lengthening, but accurate preoperative predictions of lengthening outcomes remain elusive. This study aimed to identify readily measurable anatomical parameters associated with post-ligamentolysis penile length gain, facilitating more reliable preoperative estimations.

Methods

An experimental cross-sectional study was performed on 16 adult cadavers. Data collected before dissection included: age at death, ethnicity, height, length of the penis before dissection and width of the suspensory ligament of penis. Following the complete dissection of the suspensory ligament of penis, the depth of the pubic symphysis and the penile length after the procedure were measured. The absolute and relative length differences pre- and post-ligamentolysis were calculated. Correlation coefficients were used to study relations between these variables.

Results

Penile length increased uniformly after complete division of the suspensory ligament (average gain: 26.38 mm, SD = 14.83 mm; range 4–60 mm). Pearson correlation revealed a significant negative correlation between pre-ligamentolysis penile length and post-ligamentolysis increase (r = − 0.601; p = 0.014), suggesting greater gains in individuals with shorter pre-ligamentolysis lengths. Age, ligament width, and pubic arch depth showed no significant correlations. Ethnicity did not impact post-ligamentolysis length increase (t = − 0.135; p = 0.894).

Conclusions

This study highlights the potential to predict penile length gain post-ligamentolysis through measurable anatomical parameters. The ability to anticipate the outcome of this procedure could empower surgeons to provide informed counseling, potentially elevating patient satisfaction.An experimental cross-sectional study was performed to investigate the outcomes of penile lengthening surgery

Penile lengthening was achieved in all subjects via complete dissection of the suspensory ligament of the penis

Penile length increase may be predicted preoperatively using easily measurable anatomical parameters

No Level Assigned

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266

Keywords

Anatomy
Penis
Dissection
Elective surgical procedures
Esthetics
Sexuality
Gabinete de Apoio à Investigação Científica, Tecnológica e Inovação da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa20210020 Ramos Márcio Universidade de Lisboa (UL)Open access funding provided by FCT|FCCN (b-on).

issue-copyright-statement© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Concerns about penis size have been a persistent feature of male psychology throughout history [1–8]. In recent times, penile enlargement surgeries have gained considerable popularity [1, 9–12]. Notably, individuals seeking these procedures typically possess average-sized penises and are motivated exclusively by aesthetic considerations, devoid of underlying psychopathology [5, 7, 11, 13–17].

One of the earliest and most extensively investigated surgical techniques for penile lengthening emerged in 1971, when Kelley and Eraklis developed a method to elongate the phallus of infants with bladder exstrophy [18]. The cornerstone of this technique involved the release of the suspensory ligaments of the penis [18]. This approach was subsequently refined and adapted for aesthetic and reconstructive purposes in adults, often combined with ancillary procedures such as the V-Y skin advancement flap [3, 5, 8, 13, 19–23].

The release of the penile suspensory ligament in conjunction with a V-Y skin advancement flap has become the most frequently performed penile lengthening procedure. However, the outcomes of this procedure exhibit substantial variability and remain challenging to predict. Currently, there exist no validated methods to anticipate the surgical results, leaving patients in a state of uncertainty regarding the procedure's outcome—a summary of surgical outcomes from independent reports is presented in Table 1.Table 1 Summary of the reports of penile length increase, in millimeters, across studies performed by different authors. Hyphens indicate data that were not disclosed in the articles

	Range (Max.–Min.)	Mean (Std. Deviation)	
[25]	–	35 (13)	
[19]	–	13 (9)	
[20]	33 (15–48)	20.42 (–)	
[29]	30 (35–65)	–	
[28]	65 (26–91)	–	

Moreover, as a surgical intervention, this procedure entails inherent risks for patients, as outlined in Table 2. Understanding individual predicted outcomes is paramount for enabling patients to make informed decisions and for surgeons to guide patient care and decision-making.Table 2 Summary of the possible complications of the surgical dissection of the suspensory ligament of penis [3–5, 15, 20, 22, 23, 30–32]

Possible complications of the surgical dissection of the suspensory ligament of penis	
Lesions of the neurovascular bundles of the penis	
Bulging of the penoscrotal transition	
Opening of the penopubic angle, with horizontalization of the erect penis	
Penile instability	
Paradoxical penile shortening due to reattachment of the corpora in a more posterior position in the pubic symphysis	
Hypertrophic wound scarring	
Deep and superficial infections	
Disfiguring advancement of suprapubic hairy skin	
Wound dehiscence	
Non resolving hematoma	
Temporary erectile dysfunction	

In this study, we aim to identify correlations between readily assessable morphometric parameters, including height, initial penile length, length of the suspensory ligament (measured by the depth of the pubic symphysis), width of the suspensory ligament proper, and the increase in length of the mobile flaccid penis. These correlations could serve as a decision-making tool for both surgeons and patients when considering this surgical procedure.

These parameters should also be readily measurable preoperatively, either through physical examination or non-invasive imaging techniques. The most relevant anatomical structures and corresponding measurements are highlighted in Figs. 1, 2, 3 and 4.Fig. 1 Coronal view of the fundiform ligament. Note that it embraces the circumference of the penis. Legend: a fundiform ligament; b hip bone; c corpora cavernosa; d scrotum; e glans penis

Fig. 2 Anterolateral view of the suspensory ligamentous system of the penis. Note that, after encompassing the perimeter of the penis, the fundiform ligaments’ two bundles rejoin in the ventral aspect of the penis and constitute the superior part of the scrotal septum. Legend: a fundiform ligament; b suspensory ligament of penis; c hip bone; d inferior pubic ligament; e corpora cavernosa; f scrotum; g glans penis

Fig. 3 Sagittal view of the suspensory ligamentous system of the penis, offering another perspective on the relations between the different structures. Legend: a fundiform ligament; b suspensory ligament of penis; c hip bone; d inferior pubic ligament; e corpora cavernosa; f scrotum; g glans penis

Fig. 4 Sagittal (a) and coronal (b) views of the relevant structures and measurements: (1) pubic symphysis; (2) suspensory ligament the penis; (3) inferior pubic ligament; (4) corpora cavernosa; (5) corpus spongiosum. D represents the anteroposterior dimension (depth) of the pubic symphysis. L represents the length of the penis, measured from the pubo-penile junction to the tip of the glans. W represents the width of the suspensory ligament of penis

Materials and Methods

An anatomical dissection study inspired by Littara's [12] surgical protocol for penile lengthening through division of the suspensory ligament and V-Y skin advancement flaps was conducted. This experimental cross-sectional study involved 16 penises from fresh adult cadavers. The dissections were performed by a senior plastic surgeon and anatomist, co-author of this study, with over a decade of experience in executing this procedure. The study started in October 2020, and was concluded in March 2021, at the National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences (INMLCF), Lisbon, Portugal. The study was authorized by the INMLCF's Department of Research, Training, and Documentation (DIFD) and adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki's guidelines.

Data Collection

Essential information about each subject, including age at death and ethnicity (Asian, Black, Latino, or White), was meticulously recorded. Each subject's height was measured and documented in centimeters using an anthropometric rod. The dorsal length of the flaccid penis, extending from the pubo-penile junction to the glans' meatus, was measured in millimeters using disposable, malleable, Blayco® (TELIC SAU, Spain) rulers (Fig. 5). The same ruler model was subsequently utilized in multiple steps of the dissection protocol.Fig. 5 Measuring the initial penile length, using a disposable measuring tape

Dissection Protocol

A strategically placed inverted V incision was made at the pubo-penile junction, with the apex directed superiorly. The subcutaneous tissue of the abdomen and the membranous layer of abdominal subcutaneous tissue were meticulously dissected, followed by division of the fundiform ligament. The suspensory ligament of the penis was then exposed. A photograph of the ligament was captured with an Apple® iPhone® 11 (Apple Inc., United States of America) along with a segment of the ruler placed parallel to the ligament to establish a scale. The width of the ligament was measured in millimeters employing the ImageJ (version 1.4.3.67) program developed by the National Institutes of Health (Figs. 6 and 7). The suspensory ligament of the penis was totally dissected up to the inferior border of the pubic symphysis, and the depth of the pubic symphysis was measured in millimeters using a probe and the ruler. The superficial layers of the dissected ligaments were then inverted and sutured to the deepest portion of the pubic periosteum with 3-0 polyglycolic acid suture (VICRYL® 3-0 suture, violet, braided, 45 cm, cutting), in order to fill the dead space created by the division of the suspensory ligament—in vivo, this step would prevent paradoxical penile shortening by reattachment of the penile corpora in a more posterior position of the pubic symphysis. A V-Y advancement flap was utilized to suture the pubic incisions without tension, preventing penile advancement from being hindered by inadequate skin coverage at the pubo-penile junction (Fig. 8). The surgical wound was meticulously closed in two layers—skin and subcutaneous planes—with 4-0 polyglycolic acid suture (VICRYL RAPID™ 4-0 suture, undyed, braided, 45 cm, cutting).Fig. 6 The suspensory ligament of penis is exposed, following careful dissection of the subcutaneous tissue of the abdomen and the membranous layer of abdominal subcutaneous tissue. A piece of disposable measuring tape was placed next to the anterior border of the ligament

Fig. 7 Using the ImageJ program to measure the width of the suspensory ligament of penis

Fig. 8 The closed incisions, following the V-Y advancement skin advancement flap

Figures 9, 10 and 11 portray images of three subjects before and after the dissection protocol.Fig. 9 Pre (a) and postoperative (b) photographs of one of the subjects. Notice the V-Y skin plasty incision located just above the penis in picture b. For this subject: pre-ligamentolysis penile length = 90 mm, post-ligamentolysis penile length = 120 mm, absolute penile length increase = 30 mm and relative penile length increase = 33%

Fig. 10 Pre (a) and postoperative (b) photographs of one of the subjects. For this subject, pre-ligamentolysis penile length = 80 mm, post-ligamentolysis penile length = 100 mm, absolute penile length increase = 20 mm and relative penile length increase = 25%.

Fig. 11 Pre (a) and postoperative (b) photographs of one of the subjects. For this subject, pre-ligamentolysis penile length = 120 mm, post-ligamentolysis penile length = 145 mm, absolute penile length increase = 25 mm and relative penile length increase = 21%.

Post-dissection Measurements

The dorsal length of the flaccid penis, extending from the pubo-penile junction to the glans' meatus, was remeasured in millimeters using the ruler. The absolute and relative differences between the flaccid penis length before and after ligamentolysis were calculated and documented in millimeters and percentage, respectively.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS® Statistics software, version 27. A significance level of p ≤ 0.05 was adopted for all statistical inferences. Continuous variables were presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD), and categorical variables were presented as absolute and relative frequencies. To ensure the suitability of parametric tests and correlation coefficients, the normal distribution of continuous variables was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk test. All continuous variables exhibited a normal or near-normal distribution. Correlations between the absolute difference in penile length post-ligamentolysis and relevant variables were established using the Pearson correlation coefficient (r). The independent-samples t test was employed to examine the distribution of the absolute difference in penile length post-ligamentolysis across ethnicities.

Results

The study sample comprised 16 participants with a mean age at death of 64.38 years (SD = 13.11) (Table 3). Most participants were White (87.50%), with the remaining identifying as Black (12.50%). Anthropometric measurements revealed an average height of 167.19 cm (SD = 5.53), suspensory ligament width of 1.78 mm (SD = 0.73), pubic arch depth of 60.20 mm (SD = 14.04), pre-ligamentolysis penile length of 103.63 mm (SD = 26.03), and post-ligamentolysis length of 130.00 mm (SD = 20.82). The mean absolute size increases after ligamentolysis was 26.38 mm (SD = 14.83; range 4–60).Table 3 Descriptive analysis. SD, standard deviation

Variables	(n = 16)	
Age at death, mean (SD)	64.38 (13.11)	
Ethnicity, n (%)		
Black	2 (12.50)	
White	14 (87.50)	
Height (cm)	167.19 (5.53)	
Width of the suspensory ligament (mm), mean (SD)	1.78 (0.73)	
Depth of the pubic arch (mm), mean (SD)	60.20 (14.04)	
Penile length before ligamentolysis (mm), mean (SD)	103.63 (26.03)	
Penile length after ligamentolysis (mm), mean (SD)	130.00 (20.82)	
Absolute size increase (mm), mean (SD)	26.38 (14.83)	

Pearson correlation analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between pre-ligamentolysis penile length and absolute penile length increase after ligamentolysis (r = − 0.601; p = 0.014) (Table 4). This indicates that individuals with shorter pre-ligamentolysis penile lengths experienced greater gains in penile length following ligamentolysis. Age, suspensory ligament width, and pubic arch depth did not show significant correlations with absolute length increase. Additionally, the distribution of penile length increase after ligamentolysis did not differ significantly by ethnicity (t = − 0.135; p = 0.894).Table 4 Pearson correlation coefficient (r) between absolute size increase in penile length after ligamentolysis and demographic and anatomical variables

Variables	Correlation coefficient	P value	
Age at death	−0.173	0.523	
Height	0.142	0.599	
Penile length before ligamentolysis	−0.601	0.014	
Width of the suspensory ligament	−0.420	0.119	
Depth of the pubic arch	0.241	0.388	

Discussion

This article delves into a procedure aimed at relocating a section of the concealed posterior (root) of the penis to its visible and movable anterior part (body). This adjustment enables the penis to achieve greater proximity to its erect length even when flaccid, thereby creating the illusion of increased length. Although the absolute size of the penis and its three components (root, body, and glans) remain unchanged, the perceived increase in penile length is more pronounced in its flaccid state [12].

Comprehending the complex anatomy of the penile suspensory system is crucial within the context of this surgical procedure. Due to heterogeneous anatomical descriptions in the literature, a complete yet concise review is necessary. The suspensory apparatus of the penis comprises three main components, which are, from anterior to posterior: the fundiform ligament of the penis, the suspensory ligament of the penis and the inferior pubic ligament [24–26]. They are represented in Figs. 1, 2 and 3.

The fundiform ligament adheres to the posterior surface of the subcutaneous tissue of the anterior abdominal wall. It separates into two paramedian bundles that approach and encircle the perimeter of the corpora cavernosa, without direct connection to the tunica albuginea or the pubic symphysis. At the ventral surface of the corpus spongiosum, the two bundles come together and form the superior portion of the septum of the scrotum. It is independent from the other two penile ligaments, and its role is to support the pendulous part of the penis in front of the pubis. It plays a limited role in erection and is often partially dissected in penile elongation surgery to access the suspensory ligament [8, 20, 26].

The suspensory ligament of penis is located between the pubic symphysis and the corpora cavernosa. Posteriorly, it adheres to the inferior pubic ligament. Its superior margin adheres to the pubic symphysis, and due to this attachment, one can infer that the length of the suspensory ligament proper corresponds to the anteroposterior dimension of the pubic symphysis. Inferiorly, it attaches to the tunica albuginea of the corpora cavernosa. It keeps the root of the penis attached to the pubic symphysis, concealing it and being the main target for penile lengthening surgery.

The inferior pubic ligament is situated between the inferior pubic ramus and the tunica albuginea of the corpora cavernosa. It attaches to the posteroinferior margin of the pubic symphysis superiorly and to the posterior margin of the suspensory ligament of penis anteriorly. Inferiorly it attaches to the tunica albuginea of the corpora cavernosa. The inferior pubic ligament serves as the most robust point of attachment between the penis and the pubic symphysis, playing a crucial role in maintaining penile stability. It is rarely approached in penile lengthening surgery [26, 27].

The dissection of the penile suspensory ligament followed by V-Y skin advancement flap is not a procedure without risks, as summarized in Table 2. It necessitates thorough preoperative evaluation, preparation, and postoperative care to ensure optimal results. Generally, 2 days before surgery, the patient undergoes pubic trichotomy. On the eve and day of the surgery, they should shower and scrub the genital region with chlorhexidine. Post-procedure, patients are advised, in addition to standard surgical wound care and antibiotic prophylaxis, to refrain from sexual activity for approximately 6 weeks, avoid strenuous physical activity for around 1 month, and utilize a penile vacuum/extensor from days 60 to 180 post-op.

Yet, as previously mentioned, this surgery yields highly variable results. Prior knowledge of these outcomes could be invaluable for patients considering surgery, aiding their decision-making process. Surgeons, armed with this information, can offer more informed counseling to patients seeking this procedure.

The results of this study indicate that it was effective in achieving penile lengthening in all individuals, with an average length gain of 26.38 ± 14.83 mm and a range of 4–60 mm. This is in line with the results obtained in previous studies [19, 20, 25, 28, 29].

In this study, it was also observed that subjects with shorter pre-ligamentolysis penile length experienced greater penile length gains following the procedure, which was never described before in the literature.

Although this study identified anatomical factors influencing surgical outcomes, even individuals with less favorable conditions showed some improvement. However, limitations exist due to a small and homogenous sample size, potentially exaggerating age and ethnicity-related effects. Additionally, this study was conducted on cadavers, and might not wholly reflect results in living subjects.

Further comprehensive studies examining the complete length of penile components and their relations with adjacent anatomical structures, potentially utilizing imaging techniques such as ultrasound and conventional X-ray, are imperative. A broader clinical follow-up study is advised, potentially integrating new variables like body fat percentage, to substantiate these discoveries.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that the penile lengthening technique of suspensory ligamentolysis, combined with a V-Y advancement flap, consistently produces some degree of penile lengthening, regardless of the individual's intrinsic characteristics. The strong negative correlation between pre-ligamentolysis penile length and absolute penile length increase after ligamentolysis indicates a potential predictability for this procedure. However, further research involving larger and more diverse clinical trials with live patients is necessary to establish more robust and statistically significant correlations and formulas that can be confidently applied in clinical practice.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank: Paulo Jorge Nogueira, PhD, for providing statistical analysis consultation; Pedro Henriques, senior technician of Pathology, Cytology and Thanatology at the Institute of Anatomy of the Lisbon Faculty of Medicine, for providing logistic support and assistance; Carlos dos Santos, MD, PhD, National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences; Vanda Abreu, technician of Pathology, Cytology and Thanatology; Carlos Costa, technician of Pathology, Cytology and Thanatology; David Valverde, MD, National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences and Sara Travassos, MD, for providing assistance during the dissections; to Íris Brito, MD for revising the article; and to David Bourke-Siggins for proofreading the article.

Funding

Open access funding provided by FCT|FCCN (b-on). This study was funded by Gabinete de Apoio à Investigação Científica, Tecnológica e Inovação (GAPIC), grant no. 20210020.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Vardi Y Lowenstein L Penile enlargement surgery—fact or illusion? Nat Clin Pract Urol 2005 2 114 115 10.1038/ncpuro0120 16474686
Vardi Y, Lowenstein L (2005) Penile enlargement surgery—fact or illusion? Nat Clin Pract Urol 2:114–115. 10.1038/ncpuro012016474686
2. Vardi Y Is penile enlargement an ethical procedure for patients with a normal-sized penis? Eur Urol 2006 49 609 611 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.053 16439051
Vardi Y (2006) Is penile enlargement an ethical procedure for patients with a normal-sized penis? Eur Urol 49:609–611. 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.05316439051
3. Dillon BE Chama NB Honig SC Penile size and penile enlargement surgery: a review Int J Impot Res 2008 20 519 529 10.1038/ijir.2008.14 18496548
Dillon BE, Chama NB, Honig SC (2008) Penile size and penile enlargement surgery: a review. Int J Impot Res 20:519–529. 10.1038/ijir.2008.1418496548
4. Vardi Y Harshai Y Gil T Gruenwald I A critical analysis of penile enhancement procedures for patients with normal penile size: surgical techniques, success, and complications Eur Urol 2008 54 1042 1050 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.07.080 18760874
Vardi Y, Harshai Y, Gil T, Gruenwald I (2008) A critical analysis of penile enhancement procedures for patients with normal penile size: surgical techniques, success, and complications. Eur Urol 54:1042–1050. 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.07.08018760874
5. Vardi Y Gruenwald I The status of penile enhancement procedures Curr Opin Urol 2009 16 601 605 10.1097/MOU.0b013e3283318f31
Vardi Y, Gruenwald I (2009) The status of penile enhancement procedures. Curr Opin Urol 16:601–605. 10.1097/MOU.0b013e3283318f31
6. Mertziotis N Kozyrakis D Bogris E Is V-Y plasty necessary for penile lengthening? Girth enhancement and increased length solely through circumcision: description of a novel technique Asian J Androl 2013 15 819 823 10.1038/aja.2013.58 23792340
Mertziotis N, Kozyrakis D, Bogris E (2013) Is V-Y plasty necessary for penile lengthening? Girth enhancement and increased length solely through circumcision: description of a novel technique. Asian J Androl 15:819–823. 10.1038/aja.2013.5823792340
7. Bizic MR Djordjevic ML Penile enhancement surgery: an overview Eur Med J Urol 2016 4 94 100
Bizic MR, Djordjevic ML (2016) Penile enhancement surgery: an overview. Eur Med J Urol 4:94–100
8. Chung WS Kim JY Penile lengthening with ligament release and V-Y advancement flap Penile augmentation 2016 Berlin, Heidelberg Springer 133 140
Chung WS, Kim JY (2016) Penile lengthening with ligament release and V-Y advancement flap. Penile augmentation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 133–140
9. Austoni E Guarneri A Cazzaniga A A new technique for augmentation phalloplasty: albugineal surgery with bilateral saphenous grafts—three years of experience Eur Urol 2002 42 245 253 10.1016/S0302-2838(02)00264-6 12234509
Austoni E, Guarneri A, Cazzaniga A (2002) A new technique for augmentation phalloplasty: albugineal surgery with bilateral saphenous grafts—three years of experience. Eur Urol 42:245–253. 10.1016/S0302-2838(02)00264-612234509
10. Spyropoulos E Christoforidis C Borousas D Augmentation phalloplasty surgery for penile dysmorphophobia in young adults: considerations regarding patient selection, outcome evaluation and techniques applied Eur Urol 2005 48 121 128 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.02.021 15967261
Spyropoulos E, Christoforidis C, Borousas D et al (2005) Augmentation phalloplasty surgery for penile dysmorphophobia in young adults: considerations regarding patient selection, outcome evaluation and techniques applied. Eur Urol 48:121–128. 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.02.02115967261
11. Lever J Frederick DA Peplau LA Does size matter? Men’s and women’s views on penis size across the lifespan Psychol Men Masc 2006 7 3 129 10.1037/1524-9220.7.3.129
Lever J, Frederick DA, Peplau LA (2006) Does size matter? Men’s and women’s views on penis size across the lifespan. Psychol Men Masc 7(3):129
12. Littara A Melone R Morales-Medina JC Cosmetic penile enhancement surgery: a 3-year single-centre retrospective clinical evaluation of 355 cases Sci Rep 2019 9 6323 10.1038/s41598-019-41652-w 31004096
Littara A, Melone R, Morales-Medina JC et al (2019) Cosmetic penile enhancement surgery: a 3-year single-centre retrospective clinical evaluation of 355 cases. Sci Rep 9:6323. 10.1038/s41598-019-41652-w31004096
13. Van Driel MF Schultz WC Van de Wiel HB Mensink HJ Surgical lengthening of the penis Br J Urol 1998 82 81 85 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00672.x 9698666
Van Driel MF, Schultz WC, Van de Wiel HB, Mensink HJ (1998) Surgical lengthening of the penis. Br J Urol 82:81–85. 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00672.x9698666
14. Mondaini N Ponchietti R Gontero P Penile length is normal in most men seeking penile lengthening procedures Int J Impot Res 2002 14 283 286 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900887 12152118
Mondaini N, Ponchietti R, Gontero P et al (2002) Penile length is normal in most men seeking penile lengthening procedures. Int J Impot Res 14:283–286. 10.1038/sj.ijir.390088712152118
15. Wylie KR Eardley I Penile size and the “small penis syndrome” BJU Int 2007 99 1449 1455 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.06806.x 17355371
Wylie KR, Eardley I (2007) Penile size and the “small penis syndrome.” BJU Int 99:1449–1455. 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.06806.x17355371
16. Johnston L McLellan T McKinlay A (Perceived) size really does matter: male dissatisfaction with penis size Psychol Men Masc 2014 15 225 228 10.1037/a0033264
Johnston L, McLellan T, McKinlay A (2014) (Perceived) size really does matter: male dissatisfaction with penis size. Psychol Men Masc 15:225–228. 10.1037/a0033264
17. Prause N Park J Leung S Miller G Women’s preferences for penis size: a new research method using selection among 3D models PLoS ONE 2015 10 e0133079 10.1371/journal.pone.0133079 26332467
Prause N, Park J, Leung S, Miller G (2015) Women’s preferences for penis size: a new research method using selection among 3D models. PLoS ONE 10:e0133079. 10.1371/journal.pone.013307926332467
18. Kelley JH Eraklis AJ A procedure for lengthening the phallus in boys with exstrophy of the bladder J Pediatr Surg 1971 6 645 649 10.1016/0022-3468(71)90391-5 5126285
Kelley JH, Eraklis AJ (1971) A procedure for lengthening the phallus in boys with exstrophy of the bladder. J Pediatr Surg 6:645–649. 10.1016/0022-3468(71)90391-55126285
19. Li C-Y Kayes O Kell PD Penile suspensory ligament division for penile augmentation: indications and results Eur Urol 2006 49 729 733 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.01.020 16473458
Li C-Y, Kayes O, Kell PD et al (2006) Penile suspensory ligament division for penile augmentation: indications and results. Eur Urol 49:729–733. 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.01.02016473458
20. Panfilov DE Augmentative phalloplasty Aesthet Plast Surg 2006 30 183 197 10.1007/s00266-004-0153-y
Panfilov DE (2006) Augmentative phalloplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg 30:183–197. 10.1007/s00266-004-0153-y
21. Nugteren HM Balkema GT Pascal AL Penile enlargement: from medication to surgery J Sex Marital Ther 2010 36 118 123 10.1080/00926230903554453 20169492
Nugteren HM, Balkema GT, Pascal AL et al (2010) Penile enlargement: from medication to surgery. J Sex Marital Ther 36:118–123. 10.1080/0092623090355445320169492
22. Alter G Salgado C Chim H Aesthetic surgery of the male genitalia Semin Plast Surg 2011 25 189 195 10.1055/s-0031-1281488 22851910
Alter G, Salgado C, Chim H (2011) Aesthetic surgery of the male genitalia. Semin Plast Surg 25:189–195. 10.1055/s-0031-128148822851910
23. Kayes O Shabbir M Ralph D Minhas S Therapeutic strategies for patients with micropenis or penile dysmorphic disorder Nat Rev Urol 2012 9 499 507 10.1038/nrurol.2012.150 22890302
Kayes O, Shabbir M, Ralph D, Minhas S (2012) Therapeutic strategies for patients with micropenis or penile dysmorphic disorder. Nat Rev Urol 9:499–507. 10.1038/nrurol.2012.15022890302
24. Hoznek A Rahmouni A Abbou C The suspensory ligament of the penis: an anatomic and radiologic description Surg Radiol Anat 1998 20 413 417 10.1007/BF01653133 9932326
Hoznek A, Rahmouni A, Abbou C et al (1998) The suspensory ligament of the penis: an anatomic and radiologic description. Surg Radiol Anat 20:413–417. 10.1007/BF016531339932326
25. Protogerou V Anagnostopolou S Venierates D Penis ligaments: their use in “increasing” the size of the penis in penile augmentation procedures. Anatomical description in human cadavers and clinical results of a phalloplasty series Ann Ital Chir 2011 82 199 204
Protogerou V, Anagnostopolou S, Venierates D et al (2011) Penis ligaments: their use in “increasing” the size of the penis in penile augmentation procedures. Anatomical description in human cadavers and clinical results of a phalloplasty series. Ann Ital Chir 82:199–204
26. Chen X Wu Y Tao L Visualization of penile suspensory ligamentous system based on visible human data sets Med Sci Monit 2017 23 2436 2444 10.12659/MSM.901926 28530218
Chen X, Wu Y, Tao L et al (2017) Visualization of penile suspensory ligamentous system based on visible human data sets. Med Sci Monit 23:2436–2444. 10.12659/MSM.90192628530218
27. Steiner MS The puboprostatic ligament and the male urethral suspensory mechanism: an anatomic study Urology 1994 44 530 534 10.1016/S0090-4295(94)80052-9 7941191
Steiner MS (1994) The puboprostatic ligament and the male urethral suspensory mechanism: an anatomic study. Urology 44:530–534. 10.1016/S0090-4295(94)80052-97941191
28. Klein R (1999) Penile augmentation surgery. Electron J Hum Sex. http://www.ejhs.org/volume2/klein/penistoc.htm
29. Shirong L Xuan Z Zhengxiang W Modified penis lengthening surgery: review of 52 cases Plast Reconstr Surg 2000 105 596 599 10.1097/00006534-200002000-00018 10697166
Shirong L, Xuan Z, Zhengxiang W et al (2000) Modified penis lengthening surgery: review of 52 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:596–599. 10.1097/00006534-200002000-0001810697166
30. Kramer SA Jackson IT Bilateral rhomboid flaps for reconstruction of the external genitalia in epispadias-exstrophy Plast Reconstr Surg 1986 77 621 629 10.1097/00006534-198604000-00019 3952218
Kramer SA, Jackson IT (1986) Bilateral rhomboid flaps for reconstruction of the external genitalia in epispadias-exstrophy. Plast Reconstr Surg 77:621–629. 10.1097/00006534-198604000-000193952218
31. Campbell J Gillis J A review of penile elongation surgery Transl Androl Urol 2017 6 69 78 10.21037/tau.2016.11.19 28217452
Campbell J, Gillis J (2017) A review of penile elongation surgery. Transl Androl Urol 6:69–78. 10.21037/tau.2016.11.1928217452
32. Furr J Hebert K Wisenbaugh E Gelman J Complications of genital enlargement surgery J Sex Med 2018 15 1811 1817 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.10.007 30446473
Furr J, Hebert K, Wisenbaugh E, Gelman J (2018) Complications of genital enlargement surgery. J Sex Med 15:1811–1817. 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.10.00730446473
