Cosmetic penile enhancement procedures: an SMSNA position statement

Abstract

Background: Penile cosmetic enhancement procedures have been performed for many years with varying success. However, they have historically been relegated to niche areas of sexual medicine, with limited data, and have not achieved mainstream adoption. More recently, the topic has been increasingly discussed within academic congresses due to availability of novel techniques, therapies, and procedures. Given their distinctive nature, the Sexual Medicine Society of North America (SMSNA) felt that it was pertinent to develop formal position statements to help guide both patients and sexual medicine providers on the current state of the scientific literature and to give recommendations for future research.

Aim: The study sought to provide an evidence-based set of recommendations for injection and surgical procedures designed to lengthen, augment, or otherwise cosmetically enhance the penis.

Methods: A review was performed of all scientific literature listed in PubMed from inception through December 2023 relating to penile cosmetic enhancement procedures. Only invasive (injection/surgery) therapies were included due to their distinct risk-benefit profile compared with more conservative treatments (eg, vacuum erection devices, penile traction devices). Similar therapies were categorized, with pertinent data summarized and used to help create relevant position statements. All statements were expert opinion only and were based on analyses of the potential risks and benefits of the specific therapies.

Outcomes: A total of 6 position statements were issued relating to 5 distinct sexual medicine cosmetic enhancement procedures.

Results: A consensus opinion was reached by SMSNA leadership on the state of injection/surgical penile cosmetic enhancement procedures as of 2024. Key topic areas addressed included injectable soft tissue fillers, suspensory ligament division, graft-and-flap procedures, silicone sleeve implants, and sliding/slicing techniques. Distinct recommendations were tailored to each therapy and were based solely on the current state of the literature. It is anticipated that future studies will further inform position statements and will lead to ongoing modifications.

Clinical implications: The current position statements provide both patients and clinicians evidence-based, expert recommendations on best practices relating to penile cosmetic enhancement procedures.

Strengths and limitations: Strengths include the use of an expert panel of sexual medicine clinicians, consensus design, and summary of existing literature. Limitations include expert opinion and limited research on the topic.

Conclusion: The current SMSNA position statements provide evidence-based, consensus opinions on the appropriate role for penile augmentation and cosmetic procedures in 2024.

Keywords: penile augmentation; penile enlargement; penile girth; penile length; penile prosthesis.