Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

IJIR publishes special/guest-edited issues and topical collections. The peer review process for articles included in topical collections/special issues is the same as the peer review process of the journal in general. Additionally, if the Guest Editors author an article in their topical collection/special issue, they will not handle the peer review process.​

Penile measurements in normal adult Jordanians and in patients with erectile dysfunction

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 17, pages 191–195 (2005)Cite this article

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to determine penile size in adult normal (group one, 271) and impotent (group two, 109) Jordanian patients. Heights of the patients, the flaccid and fully stretched penile lengths were measured in centimeters in both groups. Midshaft circumference in the flaccid state was recorded in group one. Penile length in the fully erect penis was measured in group two. In group one mean midshaft circumference was 8.98±1.4, mean flaccid length was mean 9.3±1.9, and mean stretched length was 13.5±2.3. In group two, mean flaccid length was 7.7±1.3, and mean stretched length was 11.6±1.4. The mean of fully erect penile length after trimex injection was 11.8±1.5. In group 1 there was no correlation between height and flaccid length or stretched length, but there was a significant correlation between height and midpoint circumference, flaccid and stretched lengths, and between stretched lengths and midpoint circumference. In group 2 there was no correlation between height and flaccid, stretched, or fully erect lengths. On the other hand, there was a significant correlation between the flaccid, stretched and fully erect lengths. Comparing group 1 and group 2, the patients in group 1 were slightly older than in group 2 (P=0.035), but there was no significant difference in their height. However, there was a significant difference regarding the mean flaccid length 9.3 vs 7.7 (P=0.001), and the mean stretched length 13.5 vs 11.6 (P=0.000). We divided both groups into those who are less than 40 y of age, and over 40 y old. There was no statistical difference in the stretched and flaccid lengths between the younger and older individuals in each group. However, when we compared the stretched and flaccid lengths in those of less than 40 y old in group 1 and 2, a significant difference was noticed. Similarly, a significant difference in the stretched and flaccid lengths in those patients over 40 y of age was also present.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Francken AB, van de Wiel HB, van Dreiel MF, Weijmar Schultz WC . What importance do women attribute to the size of the penis? Eur Urol 2002; 42: 426–431.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shah J, Christopher N . Can shoe size predict penile length? BJU Int 2002; 90: 586–587.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wessells H, Lue TF, McAninch JW . Penile length in the flaccid and erect states; guidelines for penile augmentation. J Urol 1996; 156: 995–997.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schneider T et al. Does penile size in younger men cause problems in condom use? A prospective measurement of penile dimensions in 111 young and 32 older men. Urology 2001; 57: 314–318.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bondil P et al. Clinical study of the longitudinal deformation of the flaccid penis and of its variations with aging. Eur Urol 1992; 21: 284–286.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Da Ros C et al. Caucasian penis: what is the normal size? J Urol 1994; 151: 323A, abstract 381.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mondiani N et al. Penile length is normal in most men seeking penile lengthening procedures. Int J Impot Res 2002; 14: 283–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kinsey AC, Pomeroy WB, Martin CE . Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. W.B. Saunders Co.: Philadelphia, 1948.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jamison PL, Gebhard PH . Penis size increase between flaccid and erect state: an analysis of the Kinsey data. J Sex Res 1988; 24: 177–183.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ponchietti R et al. penile length and circumference: a study on 3,300 young Italian males. Eur Urol 2001; 39: 183–186.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ajmani ML, Jain SP, Saxena SK . Anthropometric study of male external genitalia of 320 healthy Nigerian adults. Anthropol Anz 1985; 43: 179–186.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Calabro A et al. Physiological aging and penile erectile function: a study in the rat. Eur Urol 1996; 29: 240–244.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bitsch M, Kromann-Andersen B, schou J, Sjontoft E . The elasticity and the tensile strength of tunica albuginea of the corpora cavernosa. J Urol 1990; 143: 642–645.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Edward R . Definitive Penis Size Survey, 6th edn, 2002. http://www.sizesurvey.com.

  15. Evangelos S et al. Size of external genital organs and somatometric parameters among physically normal men younger than 40 years old. Urology 2002; 60: 485–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Krane RJ, Goldstein I, Saenz de Tejada I . Impotence. N Engl J Med 1989; 321: 1648–1659.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Moreira de Goes P, Wespes E, Schulman C . Extensibility: to what is it related? J Urol 1992; 148: 1432–1434.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tudoriu T, Bourmer H . The hemodynamics of erection at the level of the penis and its local deterioration. J Urol 1983; 129: 741–745.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Akkus E et al. Structural alterations in the tunica albuginea of the penis: impact of peyronie's disease, aging, and impotence. Br J Urol 1997; 79: 47–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Jordan University Hospital, Amman, Jordan

    Z Awwad & M Murshidi

  2. Jordan Center for the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction, Amman, Jordan

    M Abu-Hijleh & S Basri

  3. National Center for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Genetics, Amman, Jordan

    N Shegam & K Ajlouni

Authors
  1. Z Awwad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M Abu-Hijleh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S Basri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N Shegam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M Murshidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. K Ajlouni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Z Awwad.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Awwad, Z., Abu-Hijleh, M., Basri, S. et al. Penile measurements in normal adult Jordanians and in patients with erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res 17, 191–195 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3901272

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3901272

Keywords

  • penis
  • measurement
  • Jordan

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links