Difference between revisions of "Lower clinical neurophysiological elicitability of the penilo-cavernosus reflex"
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) (Add text and citation.) |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) (Wikify.) |
||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
'''Lower clinical neurophysiological elicitability of the penilo-cavernosus reflex''' is classified as a late [[complication]] of [[circumcision]] by Iacob et al. (2021).<ref name="iacob2021">{{REFjournal | '''Lower clinical neurophysiological elicitability of the penilo-cavernosus reflex''' is classified as a late [[complication]] of [[circumcision]] by Iacob et al. (2021).<ref name="iacob2021">{{REFjournal | ||
|last=Iacob | |last=Iacob | ||
| Line 10: | Line 9: | ||
|first3=Lauren | |first3=Lauren | ||
|init3=L | |init3=L | ||
| + | |author3-link=Lauren Sardi | ||
|title=Systematic review of complications arising from male circumcision | |title=Systematic review of complications arising from male circumcision | ||
|journal=BJUI Compass | |journal=BJUI Compass | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
|format=PDF | |format=PDF | ||
|accessdate=2022-03-01 | |accessdate=2022-03-01 | ||
| − | }}</ref> This classification was based on the work of Simon | + | }}</ref> This classification was based on the work of [[Simon Podnar]] in Slovenia. Podnar relates that he had observed in clinical practice that the penilo-cavernosus reflex seemed to be more difficult to elicit clinically in [[circumcised]] men. A formal study was established to test these obverations.<ref name="podnar2012">{{REFjournal |
|last=Podnar | |last=Podnar | ||
|first=Simon | |first=Simon | ||
|init= | |init= | ||
| − | |author-link= | + | |author-link=Simon Podnar |
|etal=no | |etal=no | ||
|title=Clinical elicitation of the penilo-cavernosus reflex in circumcised men | |title=Clinical elicitation of the penilo-cavernosus reflex in circumcised men | ||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| − | The bulbocavernosus reflex has been found to be delayed or absent at a higher rate than the general population of [[intact]] men in diabetic men with complaints of erectile impotence, | + | The bulbocavernosus reflex has been found to be delayed or absent at a higher rate than the general population of [[intact]] men in diabetic men with complaints of erectile impotence, men whose penises have been [[circumcised]], and in [[intact]] men who have permanent retraction of the [[foreskin]] behind the [[glans penis]].<ref name="podnar2012" /> |
| − | Podnar cited previous research in explaining his findings. Taylor et al. (1996) carried out a histological study of the foreskin which found large numbers of [[Meissner's corpuscles]] arranged in a [[ridged band]].<ref name="taylor1996">{{TaylorJR LockwoodAP TaylorAJ 1996}}</ref> | + | Podnar cited previous research in explaining his findings. Among other works, Taylor et al. (1996) carried out a histological study of the [[foreskin]] which found large numbers of [[Meissner's corpuscles]] arranged in a [[ridged band]].<ref name="taylor1996">{{TaylorJR LockwoodAP TaylorAJ 1996}}</ref> and Sorrells et al. (2007) carried out a study of the fine-touch pressure thresholds on the human [[penis]] and found that the most sensitive areas are all on the [[foreskin.<ref name="sorrells2007">{{Sorrells etal 2007}}</ref> |
| + | |||
| + | Men who have suffered the loss of their [[foreskin]] to [[amputation]] and men whose foreskin has been desensitized by permanent retraction evidently are unable to sense the stimulation necessary to trigger the penilo-cavernosus reflex.<ref name="podnar2012" /> | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{Citation | ||
| + | |Title=Clinical elicitation of the penilo-cavernosus reflex in circumcised men | ||
| + | |Text=The findings presented in this study might also explain the possible difference in sexual function between these two groups of men. | ||
| + | |Author=Simon Podnar | ||
| + | |Source=BJU Int | ||
| + | |ref=<ref name="podnar2012" /> | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | |||
| + | Podnar's study highlights the importance of the sensory input from the nerves of the [[foreskin]] in the regulation of physiological functions through the autonomic nervous system. | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{SEEALSO}} | ||
| + | * [[Foreskin sensitivity]] | ||
| + | * [[Sexual effects of circumcision]] | ||
{{REF}} | {{REF}} | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:Circumcision complication]] | [[Category:Circumcision complication]] | ||
[[Category:Foreskin anatomy]] | [[Category:Foreskin anatomy]] | ||
| Line 57: | Line 72: | ||
[[Category:Male genital mutilation]] | [[Category:Male genital mutilation]] | ||
[[Category:Penile function]] | [[Category:Penile function]] | ||
| − | [[ | + | |
| + | |||
| + | [[de:Geringere klinische neurophysiologische Auslösbarkeit des Penilo-cavernosus-Reflexes]] | ||
Latest revision as of 21:26, 20 December 2023
Lower clinical neurophysiological elicitability of the penilo-cavernosus reflex is classified as a late complication of circumcision by Iacob et al. (2021).[1] This classification was based on the work of Simon Podnar in Slovenia. Podnar relates that he had observed in clinical practice that the penilo-cavernosus reflex seemed to be more difficult to elicit clinically in circumcised men. A formal study was established to test these obverations.[2]
The bulbocavernosus reflex has been found to be delayed or absent at a higher rate than the general population of intact men in diabetic men with complaints of erectile impotence, men whose penises have been circumcised, and in intact men who have permanent retraction of the foreskin behind the glans penis.[2]
Podnar cited previous research in explaining his findings. Among other works, Taylor et al. (1996) carried out a histological study of the foreskin which found large numbers of Meissner's corpuscles arranged in a ridged band.[3] and Sorrells et al. (2007) carried out a study of the fine-touch pressure thresholds on the human penis and found that the most sensitive areas are all on the [[foreskin.[4]
Men who have suffered the loss of their foreskin to amputation and men whose foreskin has been desensitized by permanent retraction evidently are unable to sense the stimulation necessary to trigger the penilo-cavernosus reflex.[2]
| “ | Clinical elicitation of the penilo-cavernosus reflex in circumcised men The findings presented in this study might also explain the possible difference in sexual function between these two groups of men. – Simon Podnar (BJU Int)[2] |
Podnar's study highlights the importance of the sensory input from the nerves of the foreskin in the regulation of physiological functions through the autonomic nervous system.
See also
References
- ↑
Iacob SI, Feinn RS, Sardi L. Systematic review of complications arising from male circumcision 
. BJUI Compass. 11 November 2021; : 1–25. DOI. Retrieved 1 March 2022.
- ↑ a b c d Podnar, Simon. Clinical elicitation of the penilo-cavernosus reflex in circumcised men. BJU Int. February 2012; 109(4): 582-5. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 1 March 2022.
- ↑ Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol. 1996; 77: 291-5. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 23 September 2019.
- ↑ Sorrells ML, Snyder JL, Reiss MD, Eden C, Milos MF, Wilcox N, Van Howe RS. Fine‐touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis. BJUI. 19 March 2007; 99(4): 864-9. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 10 January 2021.
