Objective: To explore the treatment of penile incarceration with a metal ring.
Methods: Based on our experience in the successful management of a case of penile incarceration with a metal ring by coiling and bloodletting from the corpus cavernosum, we reviewed the relevant literature and analyzed the indications, advantages and disadvantages of different methods for the treatment of penile incarceration with a circular foreign body.
Results: The clamping and cutting methods were non-invasive, fast, effective, and with few complications, which could be applied to the treatment of penile strangulation at all levels. However, clamping was not desirable enough for a hard metal ring and the cutting method took a longer time and might increase the risk of unnecessary damage to the penile skin, urethra and cavernous body. Prepuce edema decompression and the thin tube-coiling method, with the advantages of minimal invasiveness, simple operation and no need of special tools, were suitable for penile strangulation injury under level 3, but might cause penile skin injury and potential postoperative erectile dysfunction. Surgical resection, as an invasive procedure, could be applied to severe penile strangulation at level 4 or 5.
Conclusions: The principle for the treatment of penile incarceration with a circular foreign body is to remove the foreign object as soon as possible and not to add secondary damage.
目的： 探讨阴茎环形异物嵌顿的治疗方案。方法： 通过复习既往阴茎异物嵌顿患者治疗相关文献并结合作者1例成功治疗案例，分析各类治疗方法的适应证及优缺点。结果： 钳咬法、切割法具有无创、快速有效、并发症少等优点，适用于各个级别的阴茎绞窄伤，但钳咬法对于材质坚硬的金属环效果欠佳，切割法存在增加阴茎皮肤、尿道、甚至阴茎海绵体等不必要损伤的风险及操作耗时的缺点。包皮水肿减压法、缠绕法具有创伤小、操作简便、无需特殊工具等优点，适用于3级以内的阴茎绞窄伤，但存在阴茎皮肤损伤及术后可能并发勃起功能障碍的缺点。手术切除法属于有创法，适用于严重的4、5级阴茎绞窄伤。结论： 对于环形异物引起的阴茎嵌顿，治疗原则是尽快去除异物并且不增加附加损伤。.
Keywords: bloodletting from the corpus cavernosum; coiling method; metal foreign body; penile incarceration.