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.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Complications of penile augmentation: A narrative review of injectables, implants, and surgical grafts

International Journal of Impotence Research (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Penile augmentation procedures are controversial, primarily because most men seeking these interventions have penile dimensions within the normal range, and due to the associated risks of severe complications. This narrative review explores the effects of foreign body implantations and injections in the penis. Retrospective case series reveal the use of unapproved oil-based substances injected in non-sterile conditions, leading to sclerosing lipogranuloma and requiring complex treatments such as tissue excision and skin transplantation. The prevalence of this practice is unknown. Retrospective reports of foreign body implantation for enhancing sexual pleasure highlight complications such as pain, erosion, inflammation, nodules, skin ulcer, necrosis, penile deformity, gangrene and even death. In contrast, prospective studies on Hyaluronic acid filler injections show that these are better tolerated, however the follow-up period is short. Retrospective series of graft implantation reported improvement in penile girth and patient satisfaction; however, it had a negative impact on penile length. Silicone implants, examined in prospective cohorts carry risks of infection, erosion, seroma and necrosis, resulting in some cases of severe penile deformities and are associated with a removal rate of up to 10%. A multidisciplinary approach is essential for men requesting penile augmentation, and further research is needed to successfully manage patients seeking these procedures.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1: Penile abscess after silicon injection.
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4: Infection in penis postoperation.

References

  1. Vardi Y, Harshai Y, Gil T, Gruenwald I. A Critical Analysis of Penile Enhancement Procedures for Patients with Normal Penile Size: Surgical Techniques, Success, and Complications. Eur Urol. 2008;54:1042–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Schmidt LB, Pold IF. [Complications to penile augmentation surgery]. Ugeskr Laege. 2021;183:V12200980.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sharp G, Fernando AN, Oates J, McEvoy P. Men’s Experiences and Psychological Outcomes of Nonsurgical Medical Penile Girth Augmentation: A Preliminary Prospective Study. Aesthet Surg J. 2023;43:181–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Furr J, Hebert K, Wisenbaugh E, Gelman J. Complications of Genital Enlargement Surgery. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1811–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Adhikari S. Penis girth augmentation using SEPA flap and dermofat grafts. J Cutan Aesthetic Surg. 2023;16:198–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. De Siati M, Selvaggio O, Di Fino G, Liuzzi G, Massenio P, Sanguedolce F, et al. An unusual delayed complication of paraffin self-injection for penile girth augmentation. BMC Urol. 2013;13:66.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Mondaini N, Ponchietti R, Gontero P, Muir GH, Natali A, Caldarera E, et al. Penile length is normal in most men seeking penile lengthening procedures. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14:283–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ghanem H, Glina S, Assalian P, Buvat J. Position Paper: Management of Men Complaining of a Small Penis Despite an Actually Normal Size. J Sex Med. 2013;10:294–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang CL, Quan Y, Li H, Li Q, Bai WJ, Xu T, et al. Penile augmentation with injectable hyaluronic acid gel: an alternative choice for small penis syndrome. Asian J Androl. 2022;24:601.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Sasidaran R, Zain MA, Basiron N. Low-grade liquid silicone injections as a penile enhancement procedure: Is bigger better? Urol Ann. 2012;4:181.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Gül M, Altintas E, Özkent MS, Fenner A, Serefoglu EC. Depictions of penises in historical paintings reflect changing perceptions of the ideal penis size. BJU Int. 2023;131:581–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Veale D, Miles S, Bramley S, Muir G, Hodsoll J. Am I normal? A systematic review and construction of nomograms for flaccid and erect penis length and circumference in up to 15 521 men. BJU Int. 2015;115:978–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Greenstein A, Dekalo S, Chen J. Penile size in adult men—recommendations for clinical and research measurements. Int J Impot Res. 2020;32:153–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Falcone M, Bettocchi C, Carvalho J, Ricou M, Boeri L, Capogrosso P, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Penile Size Abnormalities and Dysmorphophobia: Summary of the 2023 Guidelines. Eur Urol Focus. 2024;10:432–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Singh M. Penile Paraffinoma. Med J Malays. 2015;70:361–2.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Moon DG, Yoo JW, Bae JH, Han CS, Kim YK, Kim JJ. Sexual function and psychological characteristics of penile paraffinoma. Asian J Androl. 2003;5:191–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pehlivanov G, Kavaklieva S, Kazandjieva J, Kapnilov D, Tsankov N. Foreign-body granuloma of the penis in sexually active individuals (penile paraffinoma). J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2008;22:845–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gersuny R. Uber eine subcutane Prothese. Z F Heilkd. 1900;21:199.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Svensøy JN, Travers V, Osther PJS. Complications of penile self-injections: investigation of 680 patients with complications following penile self-injections with mineral oil. World J Urol. 2018;36:135–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cohen JL, Keoleian CM, Krull EA. Penile paraffinoma: self-injection with mineral oil. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;47:S251–253.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Al-Ansari AA, Shamsodini A, Talib RA, Gul T, Shokeir AA. Subcutaneous Cod Liver Oil Injection for Penile Augmentation: Review of Literature and Report of Eight Cases. Urology. 2010;75:1181–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nyirády P, Kelemen Z, Kiss A, Bánfi G, Borka K, Romics I. Treatment and outcome of vaseline-induced sclerosing lipogranuloma of the penis. Urology. 2008;71:1132–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Santucci RA, Zehring RD, McClure D. Petroleum jelly lipogranuloma of the penis treated with excision and native skin coverage. Urology. 2000;56:331.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Picozzi SCM, Carmignani L. Paraffinoma of the penis. Int J Emerg Med. 2010;3:507–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Eandi JA, Yao AP, Javidan J. Penile paraffinoma: the delayed presentation. Int Urol Nephrol. 2007;39:553–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sejben I, Rácz A, Svébis M, Patyi M, Cserni G. Petroleum jelly-induced penile paraffinoma with inguinal lymphadenitis mimicking incarcerated inguinal hernia. Can Urol Assoc J. 2012;6:E137–9.

  28. Francis J, Pooh Choo Choo A, Wansaicheong Khin-Lin G. Ultrasound and MRI features of penile augmentation by “Jamaica Oil” injection. A case series. Med Ultrason. 2014;16:372–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rollins CE, Reiber G, Guinee DG, Lie JT. Disseminated lipogranulomas and sudden death from self-administered mineral oil injection. Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 1997;18:100–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kim JS, Shin YS, Park JK. Penile skin preservation technique for reconstruction surgery of penile paraffinoma. Investig Clin Urol. 2019;60:133.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Pang KH, Randhawa K, Tang S, Fallara G, Katelaris A, Castiglione F, et al. Complications and outcomes following injection of foreign material into the male external genitalia for augmentation: a single-centre experience and systematic review. Int J Impot Res. 2024;36:498–508.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Bubishate S, Al Sharrah S, Almedej H, Elshebiny H, Almahmid M, Alenezi H. Rare presentation of penile abscess after 15 years of penile silicone injection. Urol Case Rep. 2021;39:101867.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Dellis AE, Arkoumanis T, Kyprianou C, Papatsoris AG. Paraffinoma, siliconoma and Co: Disastrous consequences of failed penile augmentation-A single-centre successful surgical management of a challenging entity. Andrologia. 2018;50:e13109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Suleiman M, Mustafa A, Ainayev Y, Urazova S, Garkalov K, Muldayeva G, et al. The surgical management of penile oleogranuloma: case series. Int J Impot Res. 2024;36:509–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Goldberg DJ. Breakthroughs in US dermal fillers for facial soft-tissue augmentation. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2009;11:240–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ahn ST, Shim JS, Bae WJ, Kim SW, Kim JJ, Moon DG. Efficacy and Safety of Penile Girth Enhancement Using Hyaluronic Acid Filler and the Clinical Impact on Ejaculation: A Multi-Center, Patient/Evaluator-Blinded, Randomized Active-Controlled Trial. World J Mens Health. 2022;40:299.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Fraser JRE, Laurent TC, Laurent UBG. Hyaluronan: its nature, distribution, functions and turnover. J Intern Med. 1997;242:27–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Widner B, Behr R, Von Dollen S, Tang M, Heu T, Sloma A, et al. Hyaluronic Acid Production in Bacillus subtilis. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71:3747–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Quan Y, Gao ZR, Dai X, Kuang L, Zhang M, Li Q, et al. Complications and management of penile augmentation with hyaluronic acid injection. Asian J Androl. 2021;23:392.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Kim J, Kwak T, Jeon B, Cheon J, Moon D. Human glans penis augmentation using injectable hyaluronic acid gel. Int J Impot Res. 2003;15:439–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Yang DY, Jeong HC, Ko K, Lee SH, Lee YG, Lee WK. Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Hyaluronic and Polylactic Acid Filler Injections for Penile Augmentation in Men Reporting a Small Penis: A Multicenter, Patient-Blinded/Evaluator-Blinded, Non-Inferiority, Randomized Comparative Trial with 18 Months of Follow-up. J Clin Med. 2020;9:1024.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Cox SE, Adigun CG. Complications of injectable fillers and neurotoxins: Complications of injectable fillers and neurotoxin. Dermatol Ther. 2011;24:524–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kusumaputra A, Setiawan MR, Soebadi MA, Wirjopranoto S. Efficacy and complications of hyaluronic acid and polylactic acid for penile augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Med Surg. 2023;85:4531–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Yang DY, Ko K, Lee SH, Moon DG, Kim JW, Lee WK. Efficacy and safety of a newly developed polylactic acid microsphere as an injectable bulking agent for penile augmentation: 18-months follow-up. Int J Impot Res. 2017;29:136–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Yang DY, Jeong HC, Ahn ST, Bae WJ, Moon DG, Kim SW, et al. A Comparison Between Hyaluronic Acid and Polylactic Acid Filler Injections for Temporary Penile Augmentation in Patients with Small Penis Syndrome: A Multicenter, Patient/Evaluator-Blind, Comparative, Randomized Trial. J Sex Med. 2020;17:133–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Kang DH, Chung JH, Kim YJ, Lee HN, Cho SH, Chang TH, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Penile Girth Enhancement by Autologous Fat Injection for Patients with Thin Penises. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2012;36:813–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Panfilov DE. Augmentative Phalloplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2006;30:183–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Ersek RA. Transplantation of Purified Autologous Fat_A 3-Year Follow-Up is Dissappointing. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991;87:219–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Wessells H, Lue TF, McAninch JW. Complications of penile lengthening and augmentation seen at 1 referral center. J Urol. 1996;155:1617–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Hehemann MC, Towe M, Huynh LM, El-Khatib FM, Yafi FA. Penile Girth Enlargement Strategies: What’s the Evidence?. Sex Med Rev. 2019;7:535–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Falagario UG, Piramide F, Pang KH, Durukan E, Tzelves L, Ricapito A, et al. Techniques for Penile Augmentation Surgery: A Systematic Review of Surgical Outcomes, Complications, and Quality of Life. Medicina. 2024;60:758.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Elist JJ, Valenzuela R, Hillelsohn J, Feng T, Hosseini A. A Single-Surgeon Retrospective and Preliminary Evaluation of the Safety and Effectiveness of the Penuma Silicone Sleeve Implant for Elective Cosmetic Correction of the Flaccid Penis. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1216–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Shirvanian V, Lemperle G, Pinto CA, Elist JJ. Shortened penis post penile prosthesis implantation treated with subcutaneous soft silicone penile implant: Case report. Int J Impot Res. 2014;26:100–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Siegal AR, Zisman A, Sljivich M, Razdan S, Valenzuela RJ. Outcomes of a Single Center’s Initial Experience With the Penuma® Penile Implant. Urology. 2023;171:236–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Juwono T, Buscaino K, Fernandez-Crespo R, Carrion R. Infection of the Penuma penile implant and associated post-operative complications: A case report. Urol Case Rep. 2021;39:101846.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Perovic SV, Byun JS, Scheplev P, Djordjevic ML, Kim JH, Bubanj T. New Perspectives of Penile Enhancement Surgery: Tissue Engineering with Biodegradable Scaffolds. Eur Urol. 2006;49:139–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Perovic SV, Sansalone S, Djinovic R, Ferlosio A, Vespasiani G, Orlandi A. Penile Enhancement Using Autologous Tissue Engineering with Biodegradable Scaffold: A Clinical and Histomorphometric Study. J Sex Med. 2010;7:3206–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Alei G, Letizia P, Ricottilli F, Simone P, Alei L, Massoni F, et al. Original Technique for Penile Girth Augmentation Through Porcine Dermal Acellular Grafts: Results in a 69-Patient Series. J Sex Med. 2012;9:1945–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Zhang GX, Weng M, Wang MD, Bai WJ. Autologous dermal graft combined with a modified degloving procedure for penile augmentation in young adults: a preliminary study. Andrology. 2016;4:927–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Djordjevic M, Bumbasirevic U, Stojanovic B, Stevovic T, Martinovic T, Bizic M, et al. Repeated penile girth enhancement with biodegradable scaffolds: Microscopic ultrastructural analysis and surgical benefits. Asian J Androl. 2018;20:488.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Tavakkoli Tabassi K, Tafazoli N, Hamidi Alamdari D, Soltani S. Penile Enhancement Using Biodegradable Scaffolds covered with Platelet-rich plasma-Fibrin glue, Mesenchymal stem cells for Micropenis. Urol J. 2024;20:7915.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Brezean I, Ferechide D, Lupușoru MOD, Petrea S. Insertion of foreign bodies in penis in the convict settlements environment. Rom J Leg Med. 2017;25:37–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Hudak SJ, McGeady J, Shindel AW, Breyer BN. Subcutaneous penile insertion of domino fragments by incarcerated males in southwest united states prisons: a report of three cases. J Sex Med. 2012;9:632–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Rinard K, Nelius T, Hogan L, Young C, Roberts AE, Armstrong ML. Cross-sectional Study Examining Four Types of Male Penile and Urethral “Play.”. Urology. 2010;76:1326–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Stankov O, Ivanovski O, Popov Z. Artificial Penile Bodies—From Kama Sutra to Modern Times. J Sex Med. 2009;6:1543–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Karakan T, Ersoy E, Hasçiçek M, Özgür BC, Özcan S, Aydın A. Injection of Vaseline under Penis Skin for the Purpose of Penis Augmentation. Case Rep Urol. 2012;2012:1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Kirkham CL, Monks SM, Crawford SB. Complications of subcutaneous penile modifications: a discussion of emergency department presentations and management. Int J Emerg Med. 2019;12:22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Flynn RM, Jain S. A Domino Effect? The Spread of Implantation of Penile Foreign Bodies in the Prison System. Urol Case Rep. 2014;2:63–4.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Marzouk E. Implantation of Beads into the Penile Skin and its Complications. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1990;24:167–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Thomson N, Sutcliffe CG, Sirirojn B, Sintupat K, Aramrattana A, Samuels A, et al. Penile modification in young Thai men: risk environments, procedures and widespread implications for HIV and sexually transmitted infections. Sex Transm Infect. 2008;84:195–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Trost L, Watter DN, Carrier S, Khera M, Yafi FA, Bernie HL, et al. Cosmetic penile enhancement procedures: an SMSNA position statement. J Sex Med. 2024;21:573–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Jin Z, Wu YG, Yuan YM, Peng J, Gong YQ, Li GY, et al. Tissue Engineering Penoplasty With Biodegradable Scaffold Maxpol-T Cografted Autologous Fibroblasts for Small Penis Syndrome. J Androl. 2011;32:491–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark

    Mahmood Ramazan & Grzegorz Fojecki

  2. Department of Urology, Urological Research Center, Lillebaelt Hospital, Vejle, Denmark

    Louise Faurholt Øbro & Palle Jörn Sloth Osther

  3. Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

    Louise Faurholt Øbro, Majken Højrup Wiborg, Palle Jörn Sloth Osther & Grzegorz Fojecki

  4. Clinic of Sexology, Esbjerg, Denmark

    Majken Højrup Wiborg

  5. Department of Urology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Mikkel Fode & Christian Fuglesang S. Jensen

  6. Department of Gynecology, Hospital of Southern Jutland, Aabenraa, Denmark

    Grzegorz Fojecki

Authors
  1. Mahmood Ramazan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Louise Faurholt Øbro
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Majken Højrup Wiborg
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mikkel Fode
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christian Fuglesang S. Jensen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Palle Jörn Sloth Osther
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Grzegorz Fojecki
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MR data collection, writing, editing, reviewing and sumbitting the original draft. LØ – data collection, writing review and editing. MW – writing review and editing. MF – writing review and editing. CJ – writing review and editing. PO – conceptualization, supervision, writing review and editing. GF - conceptualization, data collection, writing review and editing, supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Palle Jörn Sloth Osther.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. This article is a narrative review, involving synthesizing and analyzing existing published literature, and the images were used after obtaining informed consent or were reused from open access articles.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramazan, M., Øbro, L.F., Wiborg, M.H. et al. Complications of penile augmentation: A narrative review of injectables, implants, and surgical grafts. Int J Impot Res (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-025-01190-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-025-01190-8

Search

Advanced search

Quick links