MP78-18 REFERENCE RANGE FOR PENILE LENGTH MEASUREMENTS IN CHINESE MEN, AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH SOMATOMETRIC PARAMETERS: A PROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A NOMOGRAM

You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Evaluation II (MP78)1 Apr 2020MP78-18 REFERENCE RANGE FOR PENILE LENGTH MEASUREMENTS IN CHINESE MEN, AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH SOMATOMETRIC PARAMETERS: A PROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A NOMOGRAM Ting Fung Wong*, Chiu Fung Tsang, Brian Ho, Ada Ng, Wai Kit Ma, James Tsu, and Wayne Lam Ting Fung Wong*Ting Fung Wong* More articles by this author , Chiu Fung TsangChiu Fung Tsang More articles by this author , Brian HoBrian Ho More articles by this author , Ada NgAda Ng More articles by this author , Wai Kit MaWai Kit Ma More articles by this author , James TsuJames Tsu More articles by this author , and Wayne LamWayne Lam More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000964.018AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: To establish a reference range and construct a nomogram for adult male penile size in the Chinese population, and to investigate relationships between penile length and various somatometric parameters. METHODS: Men who required surgery under general or spinal anaesthesia were recruited (May 2018 to October 2019). Patients with history of penile deformities were excluded. Standardised, validated penile measurements including flaccid length, pubic arch penile length, stretched flaccid length and flaccid circumference were recorded to construct nomograms. Correlations between penile length and somatometric parameters including age, weight, height, body mass index, shoe size, hand width and finger length were assessed (Pearson’s analysis). RESULTS: 508 men were eligible. Mean age 66.3 years. Mean flaccid pendulous length, pubic arch penile length, stretched flaccid length and flaccid circumference were 9.38cm, 11.1cm, 12.7cm and 7.89cm respectively. True micropenis was 7.78cm (2.5SD=25) had significantly shorter flaccid pendulous length but greater flaccid circumference than non-obese men, (8.93cm vs 9.57m, p=0.001; 8.29cm vs 7.67cm, p < 0.001), although their stretched flaccid lengths were similar (12.5cm vs 12.8cm, p=0.145). CONCLUSIONS: We established the first penile length nomogram specifically for the Chinese population. This will help counsel patients with penile length concerns or require penile reconstructive surgery. Weight loss should be advised to increase flaccid penile length in patients who are concerned. Source of Funding: The authors received no financial support for the research. © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e1180-e1180 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Ting Fung Wong* More articles by this author Chiu Fung Tsang More articles by this author Brian Ho More articles by this author Ada Ng More articles by this author Wai Kit Ma More articles by this author James Tsu More articles by this author Wayne Lam More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...