What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Penile lengthening methods remain a controversial issue. Surgical procedures of "lengthening phalloplasty" are characterized by poorly defined indications and an unacceptably high rate of complications, as recently outlined by a literature review, while non-surgical techniques are largely popularized by the media but often lack scientific evidence. In the literature we found only ten articles/abstracts of studies pertaining to the topic of our review. With our review, we aimed to explore whether non-surgical methods of penile lengthening may have some scientific background. We focused specifically on penile extenders, which among conservative methods are those whose efficacy is supported by some scientific evidence. It seems that penile traction devices should be proposed as the first-line treatment option for patients seeking a penile lengthening procedure. Penile size is a matter of great interest among men who are affected by 'short penis syndrome' or just believe themselves to have a small penis, even though the dimensions of the organ fall within the normal range. Surgical procedures of 'lengthening phalloplasty' lack standardized indications and carry a high risk of complications. Several non-invasive methods of penile lengthening have been described, such as vacuum devices, penile traction devices and penoscrotal rings; even 'physical exercises' have been popularized through the media. Most of these techniques, however, are not supported by any scientific evidence. We briefly analyse the efficacy and scientific background of such non-surgical methods of penile lengthening. It seems that penile extenders represent the only evidence-based technique of penile elongation. Results achieved do not seem to be inferior to surgery, making these traction devices an ideal first-line treatment option for patients seeking a penile lengthening procedure.