Laparoscopic leakage ligature in deep dorsal veins of penis. Surgical technique step by step

Laparoscopic leakage ligature in deep dorsal veins of penis. Surgical technique step by step

Juan F. Uribe-Arcila 1 , Carlos A. Uribe-Trujillo 2

1 Jefatura, Residencia de Urología Convenio EIA-HPTU, Medellín, Colombia; 2 Jefatura, Servicio de Urología, Hospital Pablo Tobón Uribe. Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia

*Correspondence: Carlos A. Uribe-Trujillo. Email: medicinasexual@gmail.com

Abstract

Congenital penile veno-occlusive dysfunction is increasingly recognized as a cause of erectile dysfunction, particularly in young patients. Pathophysiological explanations have evolved, and diagnostic methods allowing for better characterization of this condition have significantly improved, making this a field with new therapeutic approaches available. Among these, dorsal venous leakage ligation has historically faced challenges in becoming standardized. The aim of the present review article is to describe a step-by-step proposal for the laparoscopic surgical technique of venous ligation in the Santorini plexus, based on the authors’ experience. The article emphasizes that accurate diagnosis is the cornerstone of successful management of this condition, for which we present a surgical technique that is accessible even in settings with technological limitations, reproducible, and associated with favorable short- and mid-term outcomes. When there is suspicion of a deep dorsal venous leakage causing hemodynamic alterations that explain a specific type of erectile dysfunction, a defined entity known as deep dorsal vein leakage syndrome can be established, characterized by typical clinical and ultrasonographic findings. Although certain medical treatment options are available, laparoscopic surgical correction of venous leakage is proposed as a viable and reproducible therapeutic alternative.

Keywords: Penis. Penile lesion. Ultrasound diagnosis. Penile erection. Erectile dysfunction.

Contents

The full content will be available shortly. Thank you for your patience!

⇄ Versión en Español
DOI: 10.24875/RUC.25000054
Add to Mendeley
    Descargar PDF
    English versión
    DOI: 10.24875/RUC.25000054

    Editorial times

    The editorial process consists of 6 stages:

    1. Reception of the manuscript (indeterminate, depending on whether the author meets the requirements): its objective is to verify that the manuscript complies with the specifications of these instructions for authors and that the submitted documentation is complete.

    2. Initial editorial review (maximum 5 business days): its objective is to corroborate the relevance, timeliness, originality, and scientific contribution of the manuscript, as well as the methodological and statistical soundness of the study. At this time, it will be submitted to an electronic plagiarism detection system. Derived from this, a rejected opinion may be obtained, or it will be sent for review by peer researchers.

    3. Review by peer researchers (maximum 30 business days): the opinion of at least two experts in the area in question will be obtained, who will evaluate the technical and methodological aspects of the investigation.

    4. Editorial review (maximum 7 business days): its objective is to make a decision based on the opinion of peer reviewers. The opinion can be rejected, major changes, minor changes or accepted. In the case of major or minor changes, it will be submitted again for evaluation by the initial peer reviewers.

    5. Final edition (6 weeks): its objective is the technical and linguistic edition (and translation), layout of galleys, DOI assignment, and correction by the author.

    6. Advanced publication: All manuscripts will be published ahead of print on the journal’s website as soon as they complete the editing process, until they are incorporated into a final issue of the journal.