Penile burn reconstruction after self-mutilation using
electrothermal device-a case report

J 2024

Penile burn reconstruction after self-mutilation using electrothermal device-a case report

HOKYNKOVÁ, Alica, Petr ŠÍN, Gabriela MICHALČÁKOVÁ, Aleš ČERMÁK, Andrea POKORNÁ et. al.

Základní údaje

Originální název

Penile burn reconstruction after self-mutilation using electrothermal device-a case report

Autoři

HOKYNKOVÁ, Alica (703 Slovensko, domácí), Petr ŠÍN (203 Česká republika, domácí), Gabriela MICHALČÁKOVÁ (703 Slovensko, domácí), Aleš ČERMÁK (203 Česká republika, domácí) a Andrea POKORNÁ (203 Česká republika, domácí)

Vydání

Burns Open, Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2024, 2468-9122

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

30212 Surgery

Stát vydavatele

Nizozemské království

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Odkazy

URL

Organizační jednotka

Lékařská fakulta

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.burnso.2024.03.004

Klíčová slova anglicky

Penile burn; Case report; Plastic surgery; Self-mutilation; Multidisciplinary treatment

Štítky

rivok

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

Změněno: 19. 8. 2024 13:13, Mgr. Tereza Miškechová

Anotace

V originále

Introduction Isolated genital burns are not frequent injuries; more often, they are part of larger surface-area burn injuries. Aetiology and mechanisms of genital burn injuries differ regarding country, age and patients’ socioeconomic status. Aim The aim is to describe a rare case report of a 69-year-old man who incurred a deep penile burn after using an electrothermal sexual device. Methods The patient was admitted to the Department of Urology (blinded for review) with deep penile burn a week after the injury. Debridement, conservative therapy, and deferred reconstruction due to extensive lymphoedema were performed. Due to numerous small, contracted skin scars of penile corpus arising from multiple healed burns caused by self-mutilation by repeatedly using an electrothermal sexual device, the penile defect reconstruction was performed. A local ventral foreskin skin flap in combination with a full split-thickness graft was done in order to avoid extensive scar contracture with possible penile deviation. Results There were no complications in postoperative care in the follow-up period of 26 months, with satisfactory aesthetical and functional results. Conclusion In the case of penile wounds, the reconstruction technique depends on the injury's size, depth and localisation of the damage.

Citovat

HOKYNKOVÁ, Alica, Petr ŠÍN, Gabriela MICHALČÁKOVÁ, Aleš ČERMÁK a Andrea POKORNÁ. Penile burn reconstruction after self-mutilation using electrothermal device-a case report. Burns Open. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2024, roč. 8, č. 2, s. 143-146. ISSN 2468-9122. Dostupné z: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.burnso.2024.03.004.

@article{2408237,
   author = {Hokynková, Alica and Šín, Petr and Michalčáková, Gabriela and Čermák, Aleš and Pokorná, Andrea},
   article_location = {Amsterdam},
   article_number = {2},
   doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.burnso.2024.03.004},
   keywords = {Penile burn; Case report; Plastic surgery; Self-mutilation; Multidisciplinary treatment},
   language = {eng},
   issn = {2468-9122},
   journal = {Burns Open},
   title = {Penile burn reconstruction after self-mutilation using electrothermal device-a case report},
   url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246891222400021X?via%3Dihub},
   volume = {8},
   year = {2024}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 2408237
AU  - Hokynková, Alica - Šín, Petr - Michalčáková, Gabriela - Čermák, Aleš - Pokorná, Andrea
PY  - 2024
TI  - Penile burn reconstruction after self-mutilation using electrothermal device-a case report
JF  - Burns Open
VL  - 8
IS  - 2
SP  - 143-146
EP  - 143-146
PB  - Elsevier
SN  - 24689122
KW  - Penile burn
KW  - Case report
KW  - Plastic surgery
KW  - Self-mutilation
KW  - Multidisciplinary treatment
UR  - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246891222400021X?via%3Dihub
N2  - Introduction Isolated genital burns are not frequent injuries; more often, they are part of larger surface-area burn injuries. Aetiology and mechanisms of genital burn injuries differ regarding country, age and patients’ socioeconomic status. Aim The aim is to describe a rare case report of a 69-year-old man who incurred a deep penile burn after using an electrothermal sexual device. Methods The patient was admitted to the Department of Urology (blinded for review) with deep penile burn a week after the injury. Debridement, conservative therapy, and deferred reconstruction due to extensive lymphoedema were performed. Due to numerous small, contracted skin scars of penile corpus arising from multiple healed burns caused by self-mutilation by repeatedly using an electrothermal sexual device, the penile defect reconstruction was performed. A local ventral foreskin skin flap in combination with a full split-thickness graft was done in order to avoid extensive scar contracture with possible penile deviation. Results There were no complications in postoperative care in the follow-up period of 26 months, with satisfactory aesthetical and functional results. Conclusion In the case of penile wounds, the reconstruction technique depends on the injury's size, depth and localisation of the damage.
ER  -

HOKYNKOVÁ, Alica, Petr ŠÍN, Gabriela MICHALČÁKOVÁ, Aleš ČERMÁK a Andrea POKORNÁ. Penile burn reconstruction after self-mutilation using electrothermal device-a case report. \textit{Burns Open}. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2024, roč.~8, č.~2, s.~143-146. ISSN~2468-9122. Dostupné z: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.burnso.2024.03.004.

Podrobný výpis o publikaci