Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Medical Case Reports 1/2022

Open Access 01.12.2022 | Case report

Use of dental drill handpiece to remove steel nut causing penile strangulation: a case report and review of the literature

verfasst von: Tuan Thanh Nguyen, Xuan Thai Ngo, Quy Thuan Chau, Khac Chuan Hoang, Le Quy Van Dinh, Hoai Tam Ly, Tien Dat Hoang, Ryan W. Dobbs, Minh Sam Thai

Erschienen in: Journal of Medical Case Reports | Ausgabe 1/2022

Abstract

Background

Penile strangulation is an uncommon urological emergency that requires prompt intervention to avoid potentially serious sequelae including loss of the distal penis secondary to ischemia and subsequent gangrene. We present a case report of a patient who presented to the hospital with penile strangulation injury of 10-hour duration secondary to the presence of a thick hexagonal steel nut. This case is presented in accordance with Consensus Surgical Case Report guidelines.

Case presentation

A 24-year-old Vietnamese man presented to the emergency room with urinary retention and decreased penile sensation following a 10-hour history of penile strangulation due to the presence of a thick hexagonal steel nut that he had placed around the shaft of the penis for the purpose of sexual enhancement during masturbation. The hexagonal nut was tightly entrapping the penile shaft, resulting in edema, congestion, and swelling of the distal 5 cm of the phallus. Given the thickness of the foreign body as well as the degree of penile swelling, we were unable to remove the hexagonal nut using traditional methods of alleviating penile strangulation injuries. Following consultation with a dental colleague, a dental diamond drill handpiece was utilized to cut the foreign body without injury to the underlying penile skin. Subsequent follow-up in clinic demonstrated no significant urinary or sexual sequalae from this episode.

Conclusion

We report a case of penile strangulation requiring novel instrumentation and collaboration for successful treatment.
Begleitmaterial
Additional file 1. Video 1: Strangulating penile nut removal.
Hinweise

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s13256-022-03342-6.

Publisher’s Note

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

Introduction

Penile strangulation represents an uncommon urological emergency that was first reported by Gauthier in 1755 [1, 2]. Since then, cases of penile entrapment by a foreign body have been only rarely reported, and only a few case series have been published, with fewer than 100 case reports [1, 3]. Penile rings are utilized by individuals to reduce venous outflow and increase penoscrotal engorgement and may be used by individuals with erectile dysfunction or to enhance sexual gratification. Occasionally, a strangulating object encircling the penis may be associated with patients with an underlying psychosexual disorder [4]. When entrapment occurs, it necessitates urgent intervention since strangulation may cause vascular injury or necrosis, even after removal of the encircling object. Hence, penile strangulation requires prompt intervention to prevent complications [5, 6]. According to the medical literature, management of strangulation penile is also challenging because there is no standard guideline for various conditions, in part due to the heterogeneous nature of such case presentations. Generally, each case is managed individually according to the clinical findings and operative setting [7].
Foreign bodies for penile entrapment comprise many materials, both metallic and nonmetallic. Thin nonmetallic objects are often easy to remove. In contrast, metallic objects are challenging to remove safely. These objects causing penile strangulation in the literature are diverse, including heavy metal rings, hammerheads, metal cones, pipes, plastic bottle necks, sprockets, and plumbing cuffs [8, 9]. Metal objects represent a particularly challenging clinical conundrum as standard surgical equipment in hospital or emergency departments may not be able to cut through these objects.
Furthermore, removing a metallic object is time-consuming, especially thick metallic ones such as hexagonal nuts. Hence, the urologist should be ready and aware of the equipment required for cutting as quickly as possible to manage such medical emergencies. We report herein a case of penile strangulation with a hexagonal steel nut resolved by using an unfamiliar medical tool, viz. a dental drill machine. Our report aims to provide a simple and effective approach to the removal of metallic objects using novel instrumentation to prevent complications such as gangrene and amputation. This case is presented in accordance with Consensus Surgical Case Report (SCARE) guidelines [10].

Case presentation

A 24-year-old Vietnamese man with no significant psychiatric or medical history presented to the Cho Ray Hospital emergency room with penile strangulation of 10-hour duration. Prior to presentation, the patient had placed his penis through a steel hexagon nut for sexual enhancement but was not able to remove the nut after masturbation. On examination, the patient was hemodynamically stable, conscious, and oriented. The patient complained of difficulty with urination and decreased sensation to his genitalia. The patient was uncircumcised, and paraphimosis was present on examination. The metallic nut was located on the penile shaft approximately 5 cm from the distal penis. Physical examination demonstrated that the shaft of the penis, which was distal to the steel nut, was edematous and congested, and the patient reported decreased sensation distally to the entrapping foreign body. There were no signs of necrosis in the glans or distal penile shaft. The initial examination is demonstrated in Fig. 1. This case is typically a grade III penile injury according to the Bhat classification and low-grade injury according to the Silberstein classification (Table 1) [6, 11].
Table 1
Summary of grading system for penile incarceration [6, 11]
Grade
Penile injury grading system by Bhat et al.
Grading system by Silberstein et al.
Grade 1
Edema of distal penis. No evidence of skin ulceration or urethral injury
Low-grade injury
Grade 2
Distal edema, skin, and urethral trauma, corpus spongiosum compression, and decreased penile sensation
Grade 3
Skin and urethral trauma, no distal sensation
Grade 4
Separation of corpus spongiosum, urethral fistula, corpus cavarnosum compression, no distal sensation
High-grade injury
Grade 5
Gangrene, necrosis, or complete amputation of distal penis
Following initial evaluation, urgent management placed an intravenous line, and the patient was given analgesics, sedatives, and antibiotics. The patient was not in urinary retention, thus we elected not to attempt to place a urinary catheter. Manual decompression and attempts using lubricant to remove the nut were unsuccessful due to the degree of penile swelling in the distal penis. It was impossible to cut the nut off using a standard bolt cutter as there was no space between the nut and the penile edematous skin. To address this, the use of a dental handpiece was considered, and a dental colleague was consulted by phone. The patient was transferred to the dental clinic in our hospital. The thick metallic nut was removed carefully utilizing a diamond drill in a dental handpiece (Fig. 2). The procedure lasted for approximately 45 minutes with continuous water irrigation to prevent thermal injury to the penis (Additional file 1: Video 1). We used mainly a handheld rotating electric drill to make progress; however, a small plastic blade was also used throughout the procedure to protect the penile skin from the abrasive drill (Fig. 3). After cutting through it at two points, the nut was dislodged from the middle of the penis without damage to the underlying penile skin. The patient was comfortable throughout the procedure. The metal nut measured 2.7 cm in inner diameter, 4.1 cm in outer diameter, and 2.2 cm in thickness; the split nut is shown in Fig. 4 following successful removal. After the nut was removed from the penis, the distal penis was flaccid, the paraphimosis was reduced, and the patient was able to spontaneously void, and the prior distal penile edema and congestion resolved spontaneously (Fig. 5). The patient was placed on antibiotics and analgesics. Psychiatric consultation was obtained to exclude underlying mental conditions or self-injurious behavior. The patient was discharged on day 1 following an uneventful hospitalization. One-month follow-up revealed that the patient had full recovery with normal urinary and erectile function. Erection Hard Score (EHS) obtained at that time was 4/4 [12].

Discussion

Penile entrapment is a rare urological emergency that can result in significant complications including edema, strangulation, ischemia, gangrene, urethral fistula, and distal penile amputation, particularly when entrapment occurs for longer than 30 minutes [13]. While in our case, removing the nut was done safely in a patient presented after 10 hours of penile strangulation, evidence has shown that the stigma associated with erectile dysfunction and masturbation may contribute to the delayed presentation in most such cases [11]. In adolescents and young men, the most common reason for utilizing these foreign bodies is mainly masturbation and sexual curiosity [14]. On the other hand, middle-aged and older adults use strangulating objects for increasing autoerotic intention and improvement of sexual performance for patients with erectile dysfunction [14, 15].
Strangulation of the penis is always an emergency and may lead to a wide range of vascular and mechanical injuries. Prompt treatment is required, as potential delayed management may lead to complications including vascular obstruction, lymphedema, loss of penile sensation, skin necrosis, urethrocutaneous fistula, urethral injury, gangrene, autoamputation of the penis, and sepsis [16]. Additionally, in such an emergency circumstance, patients are often anxious and fearful given the possibility of significant penile injury. The urologist’s challenge is to relieve the penis of strangulation as quickly as possible to prevent complications. After that, the goals of treatment are decompression and restoration of the penile vascular circulation [14].
In 1991, Bhat et al. presented a classification for penile incarceration composed of five grades (Table 1). Subsequently, Silberstein et al. simplified the grading system proposed by dividing it into two broad categories [11]. In the Silberstein classification, low-grade injuries correspond to Bhat grade I–III injuries and most of the time require no further intervention after removal of the encircling object. In contrast, high-grade injuries correspond to Bhat grade IV and V injuries and usually require surgical intervention (Table 1) [15]. In 2008, Silberstein et al. recognized higher incidence of high-grade injuries in patients presenting after 72 hours (29.1%) in comparison with patients presenting within 72 hours (0%) [11].
The choice of the method for removal of the encircling object depends on its material and size, the incarceration time, the trauma grade, and the equipment available [6, 14]. As the constricting objects involved are variable, physicians must be creative and resourceful because a given technique may be neither applicable nor available in each case. The methods and tools used to successfully remove constricting objects range from aspiration of the corpora cavernosa to the string method, use of saws, orthopedic saws, and industrial pliers [6, 7, 11, 1821]. Additionally, depending on the entrapment degree and distal edema caused by the encircling penile object, releasing it may be challenging. While the most severe injuries are caused by nonmetallic objects, they can often be easily removed by cutting the constricting object. On the other hand, it may be more challenging to remove metallic objects. A review of the literature to identify different approaches for treatment of penile strangulation caused by metallic objects is reported in Table 2. In our case, we used a dental drill to cut off the metal nut at two sites diametrically opposite to each other for easy removal without iatrogenic injury to the penis. Although dental drills have been used to remove entrapped finger rings, using a dental handpiece as an emergency tool to relieve strangulation of the penis is rare, with only a few documented cases [7, 17].
Table 2
Literature review of case reports of penile strangulation caused by metallic objects removed by string technique, nonelectric cutting, and electric cutting devices
Author
Year published
Object
Size
Trauma grade according to Bhat et al.
Incarceration time
Treatment method
String technique
 Bucy et al. [26]
1968
Ball bearing
2 cm ID
1.5 cm T
2
8 hours
Cord, glans aspiration
 Vähäsarja et al. [22]
1993
Loop wrench
Ball bearing
11 mm ID
UKN
UKN
2
5 hours
24 hours
String, glans aspiration
String, glans aspiration
 Noh et al. [21]
2004
Metal bearing
Metal bearing
11 mm ID
22 mm OD
UKN
UKN
UKN
5 hours
8 hours
String, glans aspiration
String, glans aspiration
 Patel et al. [27]
2018
Metal ring (entrapment with both phallus and scrotum)
Metal ring
6 cm ID
1 cm T
UKN
UKN
UKN
24 hours
48 hours
Industrial-grade steel bolt cutters
Bolt cutters
 Sarkar et al. [17]
2019
Metallic plumbing pipe
Metal ring
Metal ring
4 cm L
UKN
UKN
2
1
2
6 hours
3 hours
7 hours
Aspiration and string method
String method
Aspiration and string method
 Maregowda et al. [28]
2020
Two metal rings
UKN
3
6 hours
String, glans aspiration
Nonelectric cutting devices
Steiner et al. [34]
1978
Metal nut
1 cm W
2
8 days
Hacksaw
Bhat et al. [6]
1991
Metal nut
Metal nut
Metal ring
0.5 cm T
0.5 cm T
0.3 cm T
3
3
2
8 days
5 days
4 days
Hammer and chisel
Metal saw
Metal saw
Perabo et al. [9]
2002
Wedding ring
Metal cuff
Bull ring
UKN
UKN
33 mm W
5 mm T
1
1
1
3 hours
Earlier in the day
3 days
Ring cutter
Metal saw
Bolt cutter
Patel et al. [20]
2006
Two metal radiator clamps
UKN
2
6 months
Orthopedic wire cutter
Shukla et al. [16]
2014
Metal ring
Metal ring
2 cm ID
2.5 cm ID
4 mm T
2
2
14 hours
9 hours
Metal saw
Metal saw
Sawant et al. [32]
2016
Metal ring
UKN
UKN
4 days
K-wire cutter
Noegroho et al. [1]
2021
Metal ring
Metal ring
Metal ring
UKN
UKN
UKN
UKN
UKN
UKN
1 month
18 hours
16 hours
Wire pliers
Wire pliers
Wire pliers
Electric cutting devices
 Greenspan et al. [33]
1982
Steel ring
UKN
2
7 hours
Dremmel moto tool with grinder
 Bhat et al. [6]
1991
Ball bearing
3 cm T
3
5 days
Heavy drill
 Silberstein et al. [11]
2008
Metal ring on penis & scrotum
6.5 cm OD
4.5 cm ID
UKN
3 days
Dremmel rotating saw
 Etetafia et al. [18]
2014
Metal ring
2.2 cm ID
UKN
16 hours.
Dental handpiece
 Purnell et al. [23]
2016
Two metal cock rings
UKN
UKN
8 hours
Midas Rex Legend pneumatic orthopedic
drill
 Paonam et al. [7]
2017
Metal ring
UKN
3
2 days
Micromotor with wheel shape bur
 Low et al. [31]
2018
Metal ring
UKN
2
12 hours
GEM ring cutter system with abrasive discs
 Ichaoui et al. [25]
2018
Metal ring
UKN
UKN
10 days
Angle grinder
 Dawood et al. [13]
2019
Metal ring
UKN
2
12 hours
Diamond-tipped Midas drill
 Agrawal et al. [8]
2020
Metal cone ring
0.3 cm T
3 cm W
4.5 cm L
UKN
7 days
Angle grinder
 Rahmita et al. [19]
2020
Bolt ring
1.5 cm T
3
12 hours
Electric grinder
 Kyomukama et al. [15]
2021
Metal ring
2.5 cm ID
2 mm T
UKN
72 hours
Angle grinder
 Noegroho et al. [1]
2021
Metal ring
4 cm W
5 mm T
UKN
1 month
Electric grinder
 Present study
2021
Metal Nut
2.5 cm ID
1.2 cm T
3
10 hours
Dental drill with diamond bur
UKN unknown, OD outer diameter, ID inner diameter, T thickness, L length, W wide
Cutting metal produces heat as a byproduct, which may heat adjacent tissues, so care must be taken to cool the metal during this process [7]. The penis must be protected during cutting, which can often be difficult because there is usually little room between the metal and the penis. Likewise, metallic objects must be cut in two spots to avoid damage to the penile skin during removal [23]. In our case, we continuously sprinkled normal cold saline to cool both the metal nut and the penile tissue throughout the drilling procedure. We inserted a plastic tongue-shaped laminar between the strangulating nut and penile skin, which prevented penile skin and tissue injury from the force and heat. The electric dental drill represents an excellent option for removal of obstructing metallic foreign bodies as it cuts very smoothly in a short duration without significant physical exertion. Most importantly for this patient, there are no reported erectile issues after removing the strangulation in short follow-up.
Generally, the management of penile strangulation also depends on the size of the constricting object, incarceration time, injury level, available instruments, and experience of the physicians [6, 14]. If the constricting object is nonmetallic, it can be easily cut off, but thick, hardened-steel or iron nuts are difficult to remove. The lecture review reveals some points for learning:
  • Dental or industrial tools can be used to achieve the desired aim of removing metallic objects, especially when there is no space between the nut and the penile edematous skin [11, 17]. In our case, a dental drill was a helpful tool to safely relieve a strangulating penile nut with as little discomfort for the patient as possible.
  • More education is necessary to inform users of penile nuts on proper usage and how to prevent strangulation and its complications. After surgical intervention, patients with underlying mental conditions or self-injurious behavior should be referred to a psychiatrist for psychotherapy [4, 5, 24].

Conclusion

Penile strangulation required emergency management to preserve penile function. A dental drill handpiece may be utilized to successfully remove an encircling metal nut on the strangulated penis of a patient in an emergency.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Declarations

Regarding patient consent statement, the distribution of this publication was discussed and agreed upon as part of the preoperative consent.
Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication of this case report and any accompanying images. A copy of the written consent is available for review by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal.

Competing interests

The authors declare that there are no competing interests regarding the publication of this article.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Publisher’s Note

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

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

e.Med Allgemeinmedizin

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Allgemeinmedizin erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Premium-Inhalten der allgemeinmedizinischen Zeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten Allgemeinmedizin-Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.

Anhänge

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1. Video 1: Strangulating penile nut removal.
Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Gautier M. Observation d’un entanglement et des testicules et de la verge, occasione par le passage d’un briquette. J Med Chir Pharmacol. 1755;3:358. Gautier M. Observation d’un entanglement et des testicules et de la verge, occasione par le passage d’un briquette. J Med Chir Pharmacol. 1755;3:358.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Puvvada S, et al. Stepwise approach in the management of penile strangulation and penile preservation: 15-year experience in a tertiary care hospital. Arab J Urol. 2019;17(4):305–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Puvvada S, et al. Stepwise approach in the management of penile strangulation and penile preservation: 15-year experience in a tertiary care hospital. Arab J Urol. 2019;17(4):305–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Paonam S, Kshetrimayum N, Rana I. Penile strangulation by iron metal ring: a novel and effective method of management. Urol Ann. 2017;9(1):74–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Paonam S, Kshetrimayum N, Rana I. Penile strangulation by iron metal ring: a novel and effective method of management. Urol Ann. 2017;9(1):74–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Agrawal M, Gite VA, Sankapal P. Two cases of penile strangulation: varied presentations and vastly different outcomes. Afr J Urol. 2020;26(1):46.CrossRef Agrawal M, Gite VA, Sankapal P. Two cases of penile strangulation: varied presentations and vastly different outcomes. Afr J Urol. 2020;26(1):46.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Perabo FG, et al. Treatment of penile strangulation caused by constricting devices. Urology. 2002;59(1):137.CrossRefPubMed Perabo FG, et al. Treatment of penile strangulation caused by constricting devices. Urology. 2002;59(1):137.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Silberstein J, et al. CASE REPORTS: penile constriction devices: case report, review of the literature, and recommendations for extrication. J Sex Med. 2008;5(7):1747–57.CrossRefPubMed Silberstein J, et al. CASE REPORTS: penile constriction devices: case report, review of the literature, and recommendations for extrication. J Sex Med. 2008;5(7):1747–57.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Goldstein I, et al. Oral sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 1998;338(20):1397–404.CrossRefPubMed Goldstein I, et al. Oral sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 1998;338(20):1397–404.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Dawood O, et al. Penile ring entrapment—a true urologic emergency: grading, approach, and management. Urol Ann. 2020;12(1):15–8.CrossRefPubMed Dawood O, et al. Penile ring entrapment—a true urologic emergency: grading, approach, and management. Urol Ann. 2020;12(1):15–8.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Kyomukama LA, et al. Penile ring entrapment and strangulation: a case report at Kampala International University Teaching Hospital in Western Uganda. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2021;80:104982.CrossRefPubMed Kyomukama LA, et al. Penile ring entrapment and strangulation: a case report at Kampala International University Teaching Hospital in Western Uganda. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2021;80:104982.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Shukla P, et al. Penile incarceration with encircling metallic objects: a study of successful removal. J Clin Diagn Res JCDR. 2014;8(6):N01-N5. Shukla P, et al. Penile incarceration with encircling metallic objects: a study of successful removal. J Clin Diagn Res JCDR. 2014;8(6):N01-N5.
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Sarkar D, et al. Penile strangulation by different objects and its removal by the modified string method: management of four cases with review of literature. Urol Ann. 2019;11(1):1–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sarkar D, et al. Penile strangulation by different objects and its removal by the modified string method: management of four cases with review of literature. Urol Ann. 2019;11(1):1–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Rahmita MM, Parikesit D, Widia F. Penile entrapment by metal ring: case reports of effective non-surgical management. Urol Case Rep. 2020;33:101387.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rahmita MM, Parikesit D, Widia F. Penile entrapment by metal ring: case reports of effective non-surgical management. Urol Case Rep. 2020;33:101387.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Patel C, et al. Prolonged penile strangulation with metal clamps. Asian J Androl. 2006;8(1):105–6.CrossRefPubMed Patel C, et al. Prolonged penile strangulation with metal clamps. Asian J Androl. 2006;8(1):105–6.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Noh J, et al. Penile strangulation treated with the modified string method. Urology. 2004;64(3):591.CrossRefPubMed Noh J, et al. Penile strangulation treated with the modified string method. Urology. 2004;64(3):591.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Vähäsarja VJ, et al. Treatment of penile incarceration by the string method: 2 case reports. J Urol. 1993;149(2):372–3.CrossRefPubMed Vähäsarja VJ, et al. Treatment of penile incarceration by the string method: 2 case reports. J Urol. 1993;149(2):372–3.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Purnell S, et al. Successful removal of metal rings causing penile strangulation. IOSR J Dental Med Sci. 2016;15:110–3.CrossRef Purnell S, et al. Successful removal of metal rings causing penile strangulation. IOSR J Dental Med Sci. 2016;15:110–3.CrossRef
26.
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Patel NH, et al. Penile and scrotal strangulation due to metal rings: case reports and a review of the literature. Case Rep Surg. 2018;2018:5216826.PubMedPubMedCentral Patel NH, et al. Penile and scrotal strangulation due to metal rings: case reports and a review of the literature. Case Rep Surg. 2018;2018:5216826.PubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Maregowda S, Muralidhar S. A metallic ring penile foreign body causing penile strangulation: a rare case report. Int Surg J. 2020;8(1):4.CrossRef Maregowda S, Muralidhar S. A metallic ring penile foreign body causing penile strangulation: a rare case report. Int Surg J. 2020;8(1):4.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Jandou I, et al. Penile strangulation and amputation in schizophrenic patients: a reports of two cases. Ann Med Surg. 2020;60:263–5.CrossRef Jandou I, et al. Penile strangulation and amputation in schizophrenic patients: a reports of two cases. Ann Med Surg. 2020;60:263–5.CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Low LS, Holmes M. The GEM ring cutter: an effective, simple treatment of penile strangulation caused by metal rings. Urol Case Rep. 2018;19:39–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Low LS, Holmes M. The GEM ring cutter: an effective, simple treatment of penile strangulation caused by metal rings. Urol Case Rep. 2018;19:39–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Greenspan L. Tourniquet syndrome caused by metallic bands: a new tool for removal. Ann Emerg Med. 1982;11(7):375–8.CrossRefPubMed Greenspan L. Tourniquet syndrome caused by metallic bands: a new tool for removal. Ann Emerg Med. 1982;11(7):375–8.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Steiner BE. Strangulation of the penis by a metallic nut. Int Surg. 1978;63(1):17.PubMed Steiner BE. Strangulation of the penis by a metallic nut. Int Surg. 1978;63(1):17.PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Use of dental drill handpiece to remove steel nut causing penile strangulation: a case report and review of the literature
verfasst von
Tuan Thanh Nguyen
Xuan Thai Ngo
Quy Thuan Chau
Khac Chuan Hoang
Le Quy Van Dinh
Hoai Tam Ly
Tien Dat Hoang
Ryan W. Dobbs
Minh Sam Thai
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2022
Verlag
BioMed Central
Erschienen in
Journal of Medical Case Reports / Ausgabe 1/2022
Elektronische ISSN: 1752-1947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13256-022-03342-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2022

Journal of Medical Case Reports 1/2022 Zur Ausgabe