Journal of Andrology Download to Citation Manager
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Published-Ahead-of-Print September 20, 2006, DOI:10.2164/jandrol.106.000679

This Article
Right arrow Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/1/200    most recent
Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hsu, G.-L.
Right arrow Articles by Chau, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hsu, G.-L.
Right arrow Articles by Chau, C.

The Advancement of Pure Local Anesthesia for Penile Surgeries: Can an Outpatient Basis be Sustainable?

Geng-Long Hsu *, Cheng-Hsing Hsieh , Heng-Shuen Chen , Pei-Ying Ling , Hsien-Sheng Wen , Li-Jen Liu , Cheng-Wen Chen , and Ceferino Chau

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: glhsu{at}tahsda.org.tw.

Although topical anesthetic blockage for penile surgeries has been substantially reported in medical literature, its methodology, reliability and reproducibility have not been consistent. We report on several methods of topical blocks for local anesthesia in patients with indications for penile surgeries. From March 1993 to March 2003, a total of 1131 men, ages 19 to 87, underwent penile surgeries in which 165, 203, 708, 45 and 10 patients received penile implantation, modified Nesbit procedure, venous surgery, venous patches and arterial revascularization respectively, under pure local anesthesia on an outpatient basis. They were categorized into the implant, Nesbit, venous, patch and arterial group respectively. Proximal dorsal nerve blockage, peripenile infiltration and topical injection, although challenging, were sufficient local anesthesia for patients in the last four patient groups. A new method of crural blockade, however, was also required for optimal anesthesia of the cavernous nerve for implantation purposes. The anesthetic effects and postoperative results were satisfactory. Common immediate side effects included puncture of the corpus spongiosum or the deep dorsal vein as well as the in nominate vessel, subcutaneous ecchymosis, transient palpitations, and acceptable low level of pain. There were no significant late complications. In the implant group, however, 6.1% patients (10/165) had experienced pain over the perineum for 1 to 2 weeks post-operatively. Overall there were statistical differences in scoring between the five groups in which the implant group stood out when a visual analog scale of 100 mm was used. Topical nerve blockade proved to be reliable, simple, and safe, with minimal complications. They offer the advantages of less morbidity, reduced effects of anesthesia, protection of privacy, and a rapid return to preoperative daily activity.


Key words: Penis • Surgery • crural block • local anaesthesia • peripenile infiltration • proximal dorsal nerve block






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2006 by The American Society of Andrology.