{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03324468085106383, 'fraction_numerical': 0.027925531914893616, 'mean_word_length': 5.133152173913044, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
‘Straightening-Reinforcing’ Technique for Congenital Curvature and Peyronie’s Disease

Objectives: We report an initial randomised study on surgical techniques with subsequent intensive application of our procedure. Materials and Methods: We modified Ebbehoj-Metz technique by a ‘straightening-reinforcing’ (S-R) double stitch: the first performs the plication, the second tightens it, thus preventing tension during erection. This is different to the simple Ebbehoj-Metz stitch that only provides plication but, as it does not provide reinforcement, does not prevent recurrence. From 1995 to 2000 78 plications were performed: 60 for congenital curvatures (age range 18–32 years) and 18 for Peyronie’s disease (PD; age range 36–58 years). During the first 3 years, i.e. between 1995 and 1998, patients were randomised to S-R plication (20 congenital and 5 PD) and Nesbit procedure (20 congenital and 5 PD), for a total number of 50 patients (40 congenital and 10 PD). The last 28 patients, operated between 1998 and 2000, were assigned exclusively to S-R plication. We delayed study publication in favour of an adequate follow-up. Results: No patient reported a decrease in erectile function and all reported easy vaginal penetration within 3 months. In 60% of the patients undergoing the Nesbit technique, restoration of a fully satisfactory coital activity was delayed because of pain during erection; 35% of all patients had some problems with the coronal suture which disappeared 1 month after the operation, and 15% reported decreased sensibility of the glans. Recurrence rate was not significant for all patients of all groups, even if 3 PD patients of the S-R plication group and 1 PD patient of the Nesbit group received no benefit from the operation. Conclusion: S-R plication is not better than the Nesbit procedure. However, for low degrees of penile bending, both congenital and acquired, we do not think it strictly necessary to perform the more invasive Nesbit operation (requiring opening of Buck’s fascia, detachment of the neurovascular dorsal bundle or urethra and albuginea excision). Modified plication may be a minimally invasive and effective treatment suitable for most curvatures treated in day clinics and under local anaesthesia.