La ciencia puso fin a la polémica y determinó el largo promedio que "más interesa a los hombres"
Para realizar el estudio, publicado en la revista de urología BJU International, los médicos midieron 15.500 órganos sexuales. Los resultados derriban varias creencias populares
Un nuevo estudio científico presentó conclusiones sobre el tamaño considerado "normal" para el largo y la circunferencia del pene.
Publicado en la prestigiosa revista de urología BJU International, el informe podría resultar útil para aconsejar a las personas preocupadas por el tamaño de su sexo, a veces al punto de padecer dismorfofobia (temor desproporcionado de tener un defecto corporal) o interrogantes acerca del uso del preservativo y las dimensiones del pene.
Con ese objetivo, el doctor David Veale (King's College London, Londres) y sus colegas se basaron en una serie de estudios para establecer un esquema gráfico o "nomograma" que representa la distribución del tamaño del pene en reposo o en erección y sus variantes normales.
Se trata de un diagrama similar al utilizado para evaluar las curvas de crecimiento (peso y talla) de los niños y las variaciones consideradas normales.
Según el estudio, el largo promedio de un pene erecto es de 13,12 cm
Para realizar esta obra considerada de utilidad pública, los médicos británicos utilizaron 17 estudios realizados en unos 15.500 hombres, cuyo pene fue medido según un procedimiento estándar.
Según los gráficos, el largo de un pene en reposo es de 9,16 cms, y el de un pene en reposo estirado es de 13,24 cms. El largo promedio de un pene erecto es de 13,12 cms.
La circunferencia del pene, siempre en valores promedio, pasa de 9,31 cms a 11,66 cms del reposo a la erección.
Por otra parte, existe una "débil" correlación entre el largo en erección y la altura de la persona, según los autores.
EXISTE UNA "DÉBIL" CORRELACIÓN ENTRE EL LARGO EN ERECCIÓN Y LA ALTURA DE LA PERSONA
Según el doctor Veale "estos gráficos ayudarán a los médicos a tranquilizar a la gran mayoría de los hombres acerca del tamaño de su pene" dentro de los parámetros normales.
Por definición, en los gráficos la mitad de los hombres se sitúan por debajo del valor promedio y la otra mitad por encima. La mayoría de los hombres observados en el estudio son caucásicos o de Medio Oriente, advierten los autores del estudio.
Ahora, si está ansioso por compararse con el estudio, deberá seguir el mismo procedimiento de los cientìficos. Todas las medidas de longitud se hicieron desde el hueso púbico hasta la punta del glande en el lado superior del pene. Cualquier grasa que pueda cubrir el hueso púbico se comprimió antes de la medición, y cualquier longitud adicional proporcionada por el prepucio no se tuvo en cuenta. La circunferencia se midió en la base del pene o alrededor del centro del eje.
ESTUDIO COMPLETO EN INGLES:
Objective
To systematically review and create nomograms of flaccid and erect penile size measurements.
Methods
Study key eligibility criteria: measurement of penis size by a health professional using a standard procedure; a minimum of 50 participants per sample. Exclusion criteria: samples with a congenital or acquired penile abnormality, previous surgery, complaint of small penis size or erectile dysfunction. Synthesis methods: calculation of a weighted mean and pooled standard deviation (sd) and simulation of 20 000 observations from the normal distribution to generate nomograms of penis size.
Results
Nomograms for flaccid pendulous [n = 10 704, mean (sd) 9.16 (1.57) cm] and stretched length [n = 14 160, mean (sd) 13.24 (1.89) cm], erect length [n = 692, mean (sd) 13.12 (1.66) cm], flaccid circumference [n = 9407, mean (sd) 9.31 (0.90) cm], and erect circumference [n = 381, mean (sd) 11.66 (1.10) cm] were constructed. Consistent and strongest significant correlation was between flaccid stretched or erect length and height, which ranged from r = 0.2 to 0.6. Limitations: relatively few erect measurements were conducted in a clinical setting and the greatest variability between studies was seen with flaccid stretched length.
Conclusions
Penis size nomograms may be useful in clinical and therapeutic settings to counsel men and for academic research.
Introduction
The measurement of penis size may be important either in the assessment of men complaining of a small penis or for academic interest. Men may present to urologists or sexual medicine clinics with a concern with their penis size, despite their size falling within a normal range. This type of concern is commonly known as ‘small penis anxiety’ [1] or ‘small penis syndrome’ [2]. Some men who are preoccupied and severely distressed with the size of their penis may also be diagnosed with body dysmorphic disorder (BDD), where the preoccupation, excessive self-consciousness and distress is focussed on their penis size or shape [3, 4]. The diagnosis of BDD or small penis anxiety excludes 2.28% of the male population who are abnormally small as less than 2 standard deviations (sds ) below the mean [5].
Several studies have measured penile size in various samples. Some authors have tabulated studies of penile size [6-13]. Two studies have produced a nomogram for their samples [9, 11]. A nomogram is a graphical representation of the numeric relationship between two variables. Such a tool may be a helpful for clinicians to counsel men who desire to know where they lie within a normal distribution or to establish one's change in size percentile following a procedure claiming size augmentation. Building such a nomogram may also be of academic interest, e.g. to investigate the discrepancy between individuals perceived and actual penis size; or to investigate the relationship between condom failure and penile dimensions [14]. However, there have been no formal systematic reviews of penile size measurements and no attempts to combine the existing data into a definitive nomogram for flaccid and erect penile length and circumference (or ‘girth’). Therefore the aim of the present study was to create such nomograms of male penis size measurements across all ages and races, and to conduct a narrative review of the correlations reported. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method of reporting was used [15].
Methods
Eligibility Criteria
Studies were included if there was agreement of two of the authors:
Quantitative measurement of penis size was measured by a health professional.
The sample included a ≥50 participants.
Participants were aged ≥17 years.
A mean and sd of the sample size measurements were provided.
Flaccid or erect length was measured from the root (pubo-penile junction) of the penis to the tip of the glans (meatus) on the dorsal surface, where the pre-pubic fat pad was pushed to the bone.
Flaccid stretched length was measured as above while maximally extending the penis.
Flaccid or erect circumference (or ‘girth’) was measured at the base or mid-shaft of the penis, (and not from the corona).
They were published in the English language.
Studies were excluded if there was any possible bias in penis size measurements, caused by the study samples or the measurement procedure, such as if participants within the study sample had:
Any congenital or acquired penile abnormality (e.g. Peyronie's disease, hypospadias, intersex, hypospadias, phimosis, penile cancer, previous penile or prostatic surgery).
A complaint of small penis size or seeking augmentation.
Erectile dysfunction [8, 16].
A self-measurement reading rather than a measurement taken by a health professional [17].
Measurements made from cadavers.
Information Sources
Ovid Medline, Embase and PsychINFO were used to obtain separate literature searches up to March 2014. The results from the three databases were subsequently collated and duplicates removed. In addition, the authors inspected the reference sections of relevant papers retrieved through the database search.
The search strategy was:
Penis/
(Penis OR penile OR phallus OR genital*).mp
1 OR 2
Organ size/
Size OR girth OR measurement OR length OR circumference OR dimension*
4 OR 5
3 AND 6
Study Selection
The title and abstract of retrieved studies were screened by one author according to perceived relevance. The full-text articles of relevant studies were then reviewed by two authors and only included if they met the study inclusion and exclusion eligibility criteria.
Data Collection Process
All full text articles were reviewed for inclusion by at least two of the authors.
Data Item
Data extracted from each study included the authors; publication date; population studied; race; the number of participants (n); mean and sd of the age and range of participants; the measurement procedure; the mean, sd and range of (i) flaccid length, (ii) stretched flaccid length, (iii) erect length, (iv) flaccid circumference of the shaft, and (v) erect circumference of the shaft at either the base or the mid-point but not under the glans.
Risk of Bias in Individual Studies
Studies followed a penis size measurement procedure described by Wessells et al. [5]. None of the studies had used inter-rater reliability when taking measurements. Some described training procedures to ensure consistency between different raters [6]. Some described repeated measures used to ensure accuracy [18]. None of the studies describe details on how they re
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario