Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea.
J Sex Med. 2019 Apr;16(4):577-585. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.01.310. Epub 2019 Mar 2.
Studies about the clinical utility of fillers on penile augmentation (PA) are lacking. Furthermore, no randomized study has compared the utilities of fillers.
To compare the efficacy and safety between hyaluronic acid (HA) and polylactic acid (PLA) filler injection for PA.
This prospective, randomized patient/evaluator-blind, comparative multicenter study consisted of an initial 2-week baseline period and 48-week patient/evaluator-blind post-injection period. 72 patients with small penis syndrome were enrolled from 3 institutions between March-July 2016. Patients were divided into 2 groups: the HA group, comprising 36 patients injected with HA, and the PLA group, comprising 36 patients injected with PLA.
Penile girth and satisfaction were assessed at baseline and at 4, 12, 24, and 48 weeks after injection.
Penile girth increases adequately lasted ≤48 weeks in both groups (16.95 ± 10.53 and 13.49 ± 9.98 mm of mean increase in the HA and PLA groups, respectively; P < .001). The mean penile girth increase in the HA group was significantly greater than that in the PLA group at 4 weeks (P < .001). Subsequently, it gradually decreased and was no longer significantly different at 48 weeks (P = .075). Satisfaction levels increased after injection and were maintained ≤48 weeks. No significant differences were observed in the overall satisfaction level between the groups (P > .05). Filler injection-related adverse events were mild and transient and occurred in 1 and 3 patients in the HA and PLA groups, respectively.
This study provides an overview of the efficacy and safety of HA and PLA fillers, which are the most commonly used soft tissue fillers for PA.
This study, to our knowledge, is the first to compare the efficacy and safety between different filler injections for human PA. However, it was impossible to perform a researcher-blinded trial because of the unique properties of fillers, and 31 patients (43.1%) were dropped during the study period.
Both HA and PLA filler injections for PA led to a significant augmentative effect without serious adverse events and had clinically comparable efficacy and safety. Yang DY, Ko K, Lee SH, et al. A Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety Between Hyaluronic Acid and Polylactic Acid Filler Injection in Penile Augmentation: A Multicenter, Patient/Evaluator-Blinded, Randomized Trial. J Sex Med 2019;16:577-585.
关于填充物在阴茎增大(PA)中的临床应用的研究还很缺乏。此外,尚无随机研究比较过填充物的应用效果。
比较透明质酸(HA)和聚乳酸(PLA)填充物注射用于 PA 的疗效和安全性。
这是一项前瞻性、随机患者/评估者盲法、多中心比较研究,包括 2 周的初始基线期和 48 周的患者/评估者盲法注射后随访期。2016 年 3 月至 7 月,3 家机构共纳入 72 例小阴茎综合征患者。患者分为 2 组:HA 组,36 例患者注射 HA;PLA 组,36 例患者注射 PLA。
在基线期和注射后 4、12、24 和 48 周评估阴茎周长和满意度。
两组患者的阴茎周长均有足够的增加,持续时间均≤48 周(HA 组和 PLA 组的平均增加量分别为 16.95±10.53mm 和 13.49±9.98mm;P<0.001)。HA 组在注射后 4 周的阴茎周长增加明显大于 PLA 组(P<0.001)。随后,它逐渐减少,在 48 周时不再有显著差异(P=0.075)。注射后满意度增加,并持续≤48 周。两组的总体满意度水平无显著差异(P>0.05)。填充物注射相关的不良事件为轻度和短暂性的,HA 组和 PLA 组分别有 1 例和 3 例患者发生。
本研究提供了 HA 和 PLA 填充物疗效和安全性的概述,这两种填充物是最常用于 PA 的软组织填充物。
据我们所知,这是第一项比较不同填充物注射用于人类 PA 的疗效和安全性的研究。然而,由于填充物的独特性质,不可能进行研究者盲法试验,并且在研究期间有 31 例患者(43.1%)脱落。
HA 和 PLA 填充物注射治疗 PA 均能显著增大阴茎,且无严重不良事件,临床疗效和安全性相当。