Nonsurgical Methods for Penile Augmentation: A Systematic Review

Dermatol Surg. 2021 Mar 1;47(3):e81-e85. doi: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000002816.

Abstract

Background: There is no standardized approach for nonsurgical techniques for penile augmentation despite the increase of demand for this intervention.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety between different injection techniques.

Materials and methods: On October 8, 2019, a literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane database. All articles describing penile augmentation were included.

Results: Thirteen studies were included in this article with a total of 1,311 patients. Five studies were prospective cohort. The most commonly described technique was hyaluronic acid fillers with a total of 4 articles and 205 patients. The mean injected volume ranged from 20 to 40 mL. In all included studies, a minority of patients had side effects, but some had disabling complications.

Conclusion: There are no defined clinical guidelines for penile augmentation techniques implemented yet. Hyaluronic acid seems to be safe, efficient, and with a high satisfaction score. Further randomized control trials are warranted.

Ebm level of evidencebased medicine: 2a.

Publication types

  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Cosmetic Techniques* / adverse effects
  • Dermal Fillers*
  • Esthetics
  • Humans
  • Hyaluronic Acid / administration & dosage
  • Injections, Intradermal
  • Male
  • Patient Satisfaction
  • Penis*
  • Polyesters / administration & dosage
  • Polymethyl Methacrylate / administration & dosage
  • Silicone Gels / administration & dosage

Substances

  • Dermal Fillers
  • Polyesters
  • Silicone Gels
  • poly(lactide)
  • Hyaluronic Acid
  • Polymethyl Methacrylate