Abstract
Penile modifications during erection interest not only penile length and circumference, but also its size and shape. In this investigation, the size and shape repeatability of a single standardized ultrasonographic image of penis during flaccidity and erection was quantified in a group of 19 patients complaining of erectile dysfunction. The penis of each patient was placed in the dorsal position and scanned by a 10 MHz linear ultrasonographic probe at the site of maximal corporeal size: (1) during flaccidity; (2) after an intracorporeal injection of 10 μg alprostadil; and (3) after a genital stimulation. Each scan was repeated three times for each patient and printed. On each print the outline of the tunica albuginea was drawn, digitized, and mathematically reconstructed by Fourier series that allow a separate quantification of the size and shape differences. Reliability of the tunica albuginea outline and repeatability of probe positioning were separately assessed within patient and functional phase, and found to be good. The actual examinations of two impotence patients performed using the described method are also given. The shape of the corpora cavernosa may be potentially indicative of the homogeneous function of the tunica albuginea, and it may be of use in patients’ follow up.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 8 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $32.38 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sforza, C., Montorsi, F., Bianchi, A. et al. Quantitative analysis of penile ultrasonographic shape during the erectile cycle: A new diagnostic tool for erectile dysfunction? Repeatability of the method and preliminary results. Int J Impot Res 10, 203–209 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900357
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900357