PMC10413255_01
Demography of the patients, procedure, and the outcome
IPRS-12-04-t-001.jpg
PMC10413255_01_IPRS-12-04-t-001.jpg
T1
There were no complaints of abdominal herniation during the follow-up period (Figure 1 (Fig. 1)).
Exstrophy-epispadias complex reconstruction (case 1)
IPRS-12-04-g-001.jpg
PMC10413255_01_IPRS-12-04-g-001.jpg
F1
Dehiscence developed at the opposite inset margin, which was managed conservatively (Figure 2 (Fig. 2)).
Total penectomy with left inguinal node dissection defect reconstruction (case 2)
IPRS-12-04-g-002.jpg
PMC10413255_01_IPRS-12-04-g-002.jpg
F2
The flap reconstruction site healed satisfactorily without recurrent ulceration (Figure 3 (Fig. 3)).
PMC10413255_02
Left trochanteric soft tissue defect reconstruction (case 3)
IPRS-12-04-g-003.jpg
PMC10413255_02_IPRS-12-04-g-003.jpg
F3
The suprafascial flap was elevated to provide a thin, pliable coverage that mimicked the natural penile shaft (Figure 4 (Fig. 4)).
PMC10413255_03
Peno-scrotal defect (post-Fournier's gangrene) reconstruction (case 4)
IPRS-12-04-g-004.jpg
PMC10413255_03_IPRS-12-04-g-004.jpg
F4
Minor dehiscence developed at the insertion that required resuturing, with an acceptable contour observed at follow-up (Figure 5 (Fig. 5)).