To the editor,
We appreciate very much your comment about our paper published recently in Int Braz J Urol (11. Fernandez N, Chavarriaga J, Pérez J. Complete corporeal preservation clitoroplasty: new insights into feminizing genitoplasty. Int Braz J Urol. 2021; 47:861-7.). In response to your concern about the similarity (22. Acimi S. RE: Complete corporeal preservation clitoroplasty: new insights into feminizing genitoplasty. Int Braz J Urol. 2021; 47:1079-80.) to the Kelly procedure where a complete detachment of the insertions of the corpora cavernosa from the pubic bones is made, we have not been performing this procedure at all and what we are proposing is separating the corpora in the midline and then mobilizing them laterally. The difference with the Lattimer procedure is that splitting and anchoring of the corpora simply changes the angle of the corpora but does not create a buried entrapped clitoris. We do not have any data supporting results at puberty or adulthood but we believe that by just changing the angle of the corpora, erections will not be painful. We appreciate how you describe our procedure using the words a “simple separation” because that clearly describes our intention to not alter the anatomy and give patient's the potential for normal clitoral erection in adulthood. The difference from the procedure that Dr. Pippi Salle proposed for this conditions is that with our technique a reverting procedure is more feasible in the future.
The Authors
REFERENCES
-
1Fernandez N, Chavarriaga J, Pérez J. Complete corporeal preservation clitoroplasty: new insights into feminizing genitoplasty. Int Braz J Urol. 2021; 47:861-7.
-
2Acimi S. RE: Complete corporeal preservation clitoroplasty: new insights into feminizing genitoplasty. Int Braz J Urol. 2021; 47:1079-80.
Publication Dates
-
Publication in this collection
30 July 2021 -
Date of issue
Sep-Oct 2021
History
-
Received
19 May 2021 -
Accepted
26 May 2021 -
Published
30 May 2021
