Length Relationship to Surgical Measurements

[hopeful_future]

A discussion in another thread piqued my curiosity about how the surgical measurements relate to length of usable penis. My main interest is whether proximal measurements can be correlated to penile length, to what degree if so, and whether this differs based on infrapubic vs penoscrotal.

My hypothesis would be that at least per-surgeon you could get a general idea, and depending on surgical guidelines, that could extend to surgical approach...But I could be totally wrong, and it's correlated to the patient's physiological individual characteristics.

Anyway, if you have the following information and are willing to share, I'd appreciate it! I'll go first:

Surgeon: Dr. Karpman
Method: Infrapubic
Stretch Test (pre-surgery): 15cm
Proximal Measurement: 9cm
Distal Measurement: 14cm
Post-Op Penile Measurement: 14cm
Tip Position: .5cm from tip of glans

The penile measurement I'm going with is the length along the top from where the penis meets the abdomen while fully pumped. I think just note if your measurement is bone-pressed if possible.

[newbie443]

Ok, I'll add a bit. Thing is I had trouble with mine and first inflation after activation I was aroumd 11.5cm and the tips were below the glans. Weeks later when I could inflate fairly normal I was 12.7cm and the tips were 1/2 way in the glans and then was at 14cm with the tips high in the glans for a long time. Then slowly over the next year and a half I am where I am now at max pump adding inflation. I am less with just an initial max inflation and one tip is higher in the glans than the other but they do even out over time and added pumps. The above are remember measured in inches and converted to cm.

Surgeon: Dr. Kramer
Method: Penoscrotal
Stretch Test (pre-surgery): Not Measured
Proximal Measurement: 11cm
Distal Measurement: 11cm
Post-Op Penile Measurement: 16cm 2.5 years post op
Tip Position: .5cm from tip of glans

[Lost Sheep]

I strongly suspect that if you perform a regression analysis of (usable, external) penis length, against the surgeon's measurement of the internal length ot the corpus cavernosum (excluding those implants that are clearly undersized, as indicated by a floppy glans) you will find only a VERY loose correlation.

My usable, measurable penis is just under 6" . My implant is 21cm (18 cm implant and 3 cm RTEs)

Uncontrolled-for variables are going to mess with the correlation you seem to seek. Depth of crus is the major one. Also, the ration/relation of proximal and distal measurements will be affected GREATLY by the surgeon's choice of incision site, which may or may not correlate to the patient's pelvic structure.

It is very tempting to relate the proximal measurement to the depth of crus and the distal measurement to the usable penis length, but it is a fool's errand, only partially resolvable by a HUGE population sample and even then subject to the vagaries of surgeon's choice of incision site, which is essentially uncontrollable-for.

So, in short, penis length's relationship to distal measurement or total implant length (even in rigorously sized implants) have only a passing and distant relationship.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

I do, however, agree with the idea that penoscrotal vs infrapubic or subcoronal will very likely have a consistent effect on that relationship.

I hope I understood your question, hopeful_future. If I mistook, please forgive.

[hopeful_future]

Ok, I'll add a bit. Thing is I had trouble with mine and first inflation after activation I was aroumd 11.5cm and the tips were below the glans. Weeks later when I could inflate fairly normal I was 12.7cm and the tips were 1/2 way in the glans and then was at 14cm with the tips high in the glans for a long time. Then slowly over the next year and a half I am where I am now at max pump adding inflation. I am less with just an initial max inflation and one tip is higher in the glans than the other but they do even out over time and added pumps. The above are remember measured in inches and converted to cm.

Surgeon: Dr. Kramer
Method: Penoscrotal
Stretch Test (pre-surgery): Not Measured
Proximal Measurement: 11cm
Distal Measurement: 11cm
Post-Op Penile Measurement: 16cm 2.5 years post op
Tip Position: .5cm from tip of glans

Thank you so much for sharing! This is one of those great cases where an LGX lives up to its name and allows slow, steady length recovery over time. Definitely significantly higher length than the distal measurement.

[hopeful_future]

I strongly suspect that if you perform a regression analysis of (usable, external) penis length, against the surgeon's measurement of the internal length ot the corpus cavernosum (excluding those implants that are clearly undersized, as indicated by a floppy glans) you will find only a VERY loose correlation.

My usable, measurable penis is just under 6" . My implant is 21cm (18 cm implant and 3 cm RTEs)

Uncontrolled-for variables are going to mess with the correlation you seem to seek. Depth of crus is the major one. Also, the ration/relation of proximal and distal measurements will be affected GREATLY by the surgeon's choice of incision site, which may or may not correlate to the patient's pelvic structure.

It is very tempting to relate the proximal measurement to the depth of crus and the distal measurement to the usable penis length, but it is a fool's errand, only partially resolvable by a HUGE population sample and even then subject to the vagaries of surgeon's choice of incision site, which is essentially uncontrollable-for.

So, in short, penis length's relationship to distal measurement or total implant length (even in rigorously sized implants) have only a passing and distant relationship.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

I hope I understood your question, hopeful_future. If I mistook, please forgive.

Even still, do you happen to have your proximal and distal measurements to share? I like to at least attempt to be scientific about things, so my hypothesis is not something I'm seeking to prove, it's more that I'm seeking data that will either support or reject it. Of course I won't get a sample size to make any conclusions here, but I still wonder if infrapubic may lead to more correlation since it leads to a fairly consistent location for the corporotomy incision.

Of course, I believe infrapubic is still a less common procedure, so if penoscrotal is much more likely to vary, I think the data will bear out your conclusion. Though if there's enough consistency in the procedure that the penoscrotal incisions are within 1-2cm of each other, that could also still lead to a correlation, even if it's offset.

Mainly just feeding my curiosity, I'm a hopeless medical nerd and this stuff fascinates me.

[Lost Sheep]

Hopeful future

Yes, I get it. Your interest.

I will have to dig up my operations report to see if the measurements were reported there.

And I completely understand the "medical nerd" 's desire to see correlations and make sense of the world.

[Gt1956]

I can understand the concept that those measurements mean something. BUT in all of the surgery videos that I have seen. I have never seen or heard the surgeon mention anything about a " cut here", line. I have a hard time seeing that the ratio would be the same between pubic vs scrotal methods. So at the very least, you will need to know what approach was used.

[gene308]

The measurements should be close. Location of the corporatomies may vary slightly changing the direct corrolation