To date, surgical correction remains the gold standard for patients with stable Peyronie’s disease (PD) due to its high efficacy and low morbidity. Among the surgical procedures, penile plication (PP) can be offered to men who have adequate erectile function and penile length (>13 cm), with a curvature <60° and a predicted shortening of maximum 20% of the penis. The aim of this paper is to review the new developments that have emerged in the last years about the use of PP in patients with PD. A nonsystematic review of the literature was carried out searching in the PubMed and EMBASE databases from January 01, 2009 to April 01, 2019 including the words ‘Peyronie’, ‘penile curvature’, ‘penile induration’, ‘plication’, and ‘plicature’. New developments in PP in the last 10 years include avoiding degloving by using a penoscrotal incision, a new mathematical model to predict loss of length after PP, a wider range of indications including patients with severe (≥60°) or complex curvatures, burying knots to avoid later discomfort, and thinning or incising the plaque to prevent excessive shortening. PP is a well-founded procedure with great results in appropriately selected patients. Given the lack of any prospective randomized trial, no clear recommendation can be made of one technique over another.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 8 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $32.38 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Get just this article for as long as you need it
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Chung E, Ralph D, Kagioglu A, Garaffa G, Shamsodini A, Bivalacqua T, et al. Evidence-based management guidelines on peyronie’s disease. J Sex Med. 2016;13:905–23.
Brock G, Hsu GL, Nunes L, von Heyden B, Lue TF. The anatomy of the tunica albuginea in the normal penis and Peyronie’s disease. J Urol. 1997;157:276–81.
Professionals S-O. EAU guidelines: male sexual dysfunction. Uroweb. https://uroweb.org/guideline/male-sexual-dysfunction/.
Mobley EM, Fuchs ME, Myers JB, Brant WO. Update on plication procedures for Peyronie’s disease and other penile deformities. Ther Adv Urol. 2012;4:335–46.
Yafi FA, Hatzichristodoulou G, Knoedler CJ, Trost LW, Sikka SC, Hellstrom WJG. Comparative analysis of tunical plication vs. intralesional injection therapy for ventral Peyronie’s disease. J Sex Med. 2015;12:2492–8.
Gelbard M, Goldstein I, Hellstrom WJG, McMahon CG, Smith T, Tursi J, et al. Clinical efficacy, safety and tolerability of collagenase clostridium histolyticum for the treatment of peyronie disease in 2 large double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled phase 3 studies. J Urol. 2013;190:199–207.
Cordon BH, Sundaram V, Hofer MD, Kavoussi NL, Scott JM, Morey AF. Penile plication as salvage strategy for refractory Peyronie’s disease deformities. Urol Pract. 2016;4:149–54.
Reddy RS, McKibben MJ, Fuchs JS, Shakir N, Scott J, Morey AF. Plication for severe Peyronie’s deformities has similar long-term outcomes to milder cases. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1498–505.
Garcia-Gomez B, Ralph D, Levine L, Moncada-Iribarren I, Djinovic R, Albersen M, et al. Grafts for Peyronie’s disease: a comprehensive review. Andrology. 2018;6:117–26.
Nesbit RM. Congenital curvature of the phallus: report of three cases with description of corrective operation. J Urol. 1965;93:230–2.
Pryor JP, Fitzpatrick JM. A new approach to the correction of the penile deformity in Peyronie’s disease. J Urol. 1979;122:622–3.
Yachia D. Modified corporoplasty for the treatment of penile curvature. J Urol. 1990;143:80–2.
Rehman J, Benet A, Minsky LS, Melman A. Results of surgical treatment for abnormal penile curvature: Peyronie’s disease and congenital deviation by modified Nesbit plication (tunical shaving and plication). J Urol. 1997;157:1288–91.
Essed E, Schroeder FH. New surgical treatment for Peyronie disease. Urology. 1985;25:582–7.
Baskin LS, Duckett JW. Dorsal tunica albuginea plication for hypospadias curvature. J Urol. 1994;151:1668–71.
Baskin LS, Lue TF. The correction of congenital penile curvature in young men. Br J Urol. 1998;81:895–9.
Gholami SS, Lue TF. Correction of penile curvature using the 16-dot plication technique: a review of 132 patients. J Urol. 2002;167:2066–9.
Langston JP, Carson CC. Peyronie disease: plication or grafting. Urol Clin North Am. 2011;38:207–16.
Cantoro U, Polito M, Catanzariti F, Montesi L, Lacetera V, Muzzonigro G. Penile plication for Peyronie’s disease: our results with mean follow-up of 103 months on 89 patients. Int J Impot Res. 2014;26:156–9.
Seveso M, Melegari S, De Francesco O, Macchi A, Romero Otero J, Taverna G, et al. Surgical correction of Peyronie’s disease via tunica albuginea plication: long-term follow-up. Andrology. 2018;6:47–52.
Parnham Arie S, Parnham Stewart M, Pearce Ian. A mathematical model to predict the loss of length in patients undergoing plication corporoplasty for Peyronie’s disease. J Clin Urol. 2017;10:5–8.
Hudak SJ, Morey AF, Adibi M, Bagrodia A. Favorable patient reported outcomes after penile plication for wide array of peyronie disease abnormalities. J Urol. 2013;189:1019–24.
Dugi DD, Morey AF. Penoscrotal plication as a uniform approach to reconstruction of penile curvature. BJU Int. 2010;105:1440–4.
Kadioglu A, Küçükdurmaz F, Sanli O. Current status of the surgical management of Peyronie’s disease. Nat Rev Urol. 2011;8:95–106.
Adibi M, Hudak SJ, Morey AF. Penile plication without degloving enables effective correction of complex Peyronie’s deformities. Urology. 2012;79:831–5.
Chung PH, Tausch TJ, Simhan J, Scott JF, Morey AF. Dorsal plication without degloving is safe and effective for correcting ventral penile deformities. Urology. 2014;84:1228–33.
Kadirov R, Coskun B, Kaygisiz O, Gunseren KO, Kordan Y, Yavascaoglu I, et al. Penile plication with or without degloving of the penis results in similar outcomes. Sex Med. 2017;5:e142–7.
Salem EA. Modified 16-Dot plication technique for correction of penile curvature: prevention of knot-related complications. Int J Impot Res. 2018;30:117–21.
van der Horst C, Martínez Portillo FJ, Melchior D, Bross S, Alken P, Juenemann K-P. Polytetrafluoroethylene versus polypropylene sutures for Essed-Schroeder tunical plication. J Urol. 2003;170:472–5.
Shefi S, Pinthus JH, Mor Y, Raviv G, Ramon J, Hanani JI. To bury the knot, then, is better than not. Urology. 2008;71:1206–8.
Schultheiss D, Meschi MR, Hagemann J, Truss MC, Stief CG, Jonas U. Congenital and acquired penile deviation treated with the essed plication method. Eur Urol. 2000;38:167–71.
Papagiannopoulos D, Phelps J, Yura E, Levine LA. Surgical outcomes from limiting the use of nonabsorbable suture in tunica albuginea plication for Peyronie’s disease. Int J Impot Res. 2017;29:258–61.
Hamed HA, Roaiah M, Hassanin AM, Zaazaa AA, Fawzi M. A new technique, combined plication-incision (CPI), for correction of penile curvature. Int Braz J Urol J Braz Soc Urol. 2018;44:180–7.
Ding S, Lü J, Zhang H, Wei L, Ding K. A novel modification of tunical plication by plaque thinning: long-term results in treating penile curvature of Peyronie’s disease. Int Urol Nephrol. 2010;42:597–602.
Shin SH, Jeong HG, Park JJ, Chae JY, Kim JW, Oh MM, et al. The outcome of multiple slit on plaque with plication technique for the treatment of Peyronie’s disease. World J Mens Health. 2016;34:20–7.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
García-Gómez, B., González-Padilla, D.A., Alonso-Isa, M. et al. Plication techniques in Peyronie’s disease: new developments. Int J Impot Res 32, 30–36 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-019-0204-1