Complications following division of the penile suspensory ligament
https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2026-14-1-106-111
Abstract
Introduction. Division of the penile suspensory ligament (ligamentotomy) is a surgical procedure aimed at lengthening the visible part of the penis. This operation is widely used in aesthetic and reconstructive surgery for patients who are dissatisfied with the size of their penis or suffer from psychosexual discomfort. As with any surgical treatment, ligamentotomy also carries risks of complications.
Objective. To evaluate the frequency and structure of postoperative complications in patients who have undergone penile suspensory ligament division.
Materials & methods. We analyzed the frequency and type of complications in 66 patients who underwent division of the suspensory ligament of the penis in combination with various skin plasty techniques.
Results. The most common complications in this cohort of patients are seroma, penile edema, gross scarring, and superficial wound complications. Complications were mainly classified as grade I and II according to the ClavienDindo classification.
Conclusions. Serious complications are rare during ligamentotomy. Mild and moderate conditions predominate, requiring no additional surgical interventions. The Clavien–Dindo classification allows for objective risk stratification and may be recommended for use in clinical practice when assessing the outcomes of penile augmentation surgery.
Keywords
penile elongation,
penile ligament division,
suspensory ligament of penis,
augmentation penile surgery,
complications of penile ligament division
Supporting agencies: The study was not sponsored.
About the Authors
K. S. Guluzade
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Kanan S. Guluzade
Moscow
Competing Interests:
The manuscript underwent the journal’s standard independent peer‑review process. The authors report no other conflicts of interest
S. I. Gamidov
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University); Kulakov National Medical Research Centre
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Gamidov Safar.I. — Dr.Sc.(Med), Full Prof.
Moscow
Competing Interests:
Safar I. Gamidov, the author of this article, is a member of the Editorial Board of Urology Herald
T. V. Shatylko
Kulakov National Medical Research Centre
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Taras.V. Shatylko — Cand.Sc.(Med)
Moscow
Competing Interests:
The manuscript underwent the journal’s standard independent peer‑review process. The authors report no other conflicts of interest
References
1. Mondaini N, Ponchietti R, Gontero P, Muir GH, Natali A, Caldarera E, Biscioni S, Rizzo M. Penile length is normal in most men seeking penile lengthening procedures. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14(4):283-286. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900887
2. Sharp G, Fernando AN, Kyron M, Oates J, McEvoy P. Motivations and Psychological Characteristics of Men Seeking Penile Girth Augmentation. Aesthet Surg J. 2022;42(11):1305-1315. DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjac112
3. Littara A, Melone R, Morales-Medina JC, Iannitti T, Palmieri B. Cosmetic penile enhancement surgery: a 3-year single-centre retrospective clinical evaluation of 355 cases. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):6323. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-41652-w
4. Falagario UG, Piramide F, Pang KH, Durukan E, Tzelves L, Ricapito A, Baekelandt L, Checcucci E, Carrion DM, Bettocchi C, Esperto F. Techniques for Penile Augmentation Surgery: A Systematic Review of Surgical Outcomes, Complications, and Quality of Life. Medicina (Kaunas). 2024;60(5):758. DOI: 10.3390/medicina60050758
5. Yener S, Ayyıldız HNK, Güvenç FT, Yıldız ZA, İlçe Z. Surgical technique experience and results for concealed penis. Pediatr Surg Int. 2025;41(1):113. DOI: 10.1007/s00383-025-06013-x
6. Wessells H, Lue TF, McAninch JW. Complications of Penile Lengthening and Augmentation Seen at 1 Referral Center. The Journal of Urology. 1996;155(5):1617-1620. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)66144-5
7. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205-213. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
8. Mitropoulos D, Artibani W, Graefen M, Remzi M, Rouprêt M, Truss M; European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel. Reporting and grading of complications after urologic surgical procedures: an ad hoc EAU guidelines panel assessment and recommendations. Eur Urol. 2012;61(2):341-349. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.033
9. Ding G, Tang G, Wang T, Zou Q, Cui Y, Wu J. A comparative analysis of perioperative complications and biochemical recurrence between standard and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2024;110(3):1735-1743. DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000997
10. Yoon PD, Chalasani V, Woo HH. Use of Clavien-Dindo classification in reporting and grading complications after urological surgical procedures: analysis of 2010 to 2012. J Urol. 2013;190(4):1271-1274. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.025
11. Virk A, Leslie S, Ahmadi N, Thanigasalam N, Doeuk N, Woo H. Prevalence of the Clavien Dindo Classification in the Reporting of Surgical Complications in Major Urological Journals. Soc. Int. Urol. J. 2023;4:392-397. DOI: 10.48083/CVNU8623
12. Rac G, Greiman A, Rabley A, Tipton TJ, Chiles LR, Freilich DA, Rames R, Cox L, Koski M, Rovner ES. Analysis of Complications of Pelvic Mesh Excision Surgery Using the Clavien-Dindo Classification System. J Urol. 2017;198(3):638-643. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.04.078
13. El-Hefnawy AS, Wadie BS. Reporting and grading of complications after mid-urethral sling surgeries: Could the “Clavien-Dindo Classification” be adopted? Curr Urol. 2021;15(2):101-105. DOI: 10.1097/CU9.0000000000000018
14. Siegal AR, Celtik KE, Razdan S, Sljivich M, Kansas B, Shah B, Levine LA, Valenzuela RJ. A multi-institutional update on surgical outcomes after penile silicone sleeve implantation. Ther Adv Urol. 2024;16:17562872241241858. DOI: 10.1177/17562872241241858
Review
For citations:
Guluzade K.S., Gamidov S.I., Shatylko T.V. Complications following division of the penile suspensory ligament. Urology Herald. 2026;14(1):106-111. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2026-14-1-106-111
Views:
217
JATS XML
Email this article 