Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsCase Report / SeriesPubMedOpen access

Reconstruction of penile skin defect using negative pressure therapy, spiraling full-thickness skin grafts, and nanofat grafting: a case report.

Buitrago DMC., Díaz MFA., López AMC., Ardila JSA., Acosta JLC.

Case Report / Series, published in J Surg Case Rep (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Case Report / Series
Journal
J Surg Case Rep (2024)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
39606040
PMCID
PMC11602156
DOI
10.1093/jscr/rjae663
Citations
2

Abstract (original English)

The penis is a structure that requires both anatomical and functional reconstruction. Being a three-dimensional structure that changes in volume, it presents a reconstructive challenge for the plastic surgeon. Currently, various alternatives are available for covering these complex defects, such as grafts, flaps, and dermal matrices. The objective of this study is to present a case report describing a complex post-traumatic penile defect in which three combined strategies were implemented for the first time (spiral full-thickness grafts, nanolipoinjection, and negative pressure therapy). These strategies have been described in the literature for defect coverage, achieving satisfactory anatomical and functional results.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.