British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) consensus document on male genital augmentation and enhancement procedures

Objective: To critically appraise the safety and efficacy of male genital augmentation and enhancement procedures, and to formulate consensus recommendations for urologists and medical professionals. Methods: A systematic search of the literature published between 2000 and 2025 was conducted. Outcomes of interest focused on penile length and girth changes, complications, and validated patient-reported outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB-2 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for non-randomised studies. Evidence was synthesised qualitatively by intervention type. Consensus recommendations were generated through structured group appraisal by the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Section of Andrology and Genitourethral Surgery (AGUS), integrating the evidence base with expert opinion, quality assessments, and patient safety considerations. Results: Thirty-six studies ( n = 3748) were included: 12 injectable fillers and 24 surgical. Injectable fillers produced short-term girth gains with mild, transient complications. Surgical procedures demonstrated modest increases in length and girth, though complicated by infection, fibrosis, and/or device removal. Across the eligible evidence, the risk of bias was high, the quality of evidence was low, and expert opinion was consistently low. Conclusion: Evidence quality remains poor, heterogeneous, and methodologically limited. As such, five key recommendations were generated by the BAUS AGUS committee on genital augmentation and enhancement with either injectable fillers or surgical procedures. Level of evidence: 2

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Urology
Published
2026-01-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/20514158251391054
Primary Topic
Sexual function and dysfunction studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) consensus document on male genital augmentation and enhancement procedures

Maria Satchi, Mahua Sahu, Vaibhav Modgil, Odunayo Kalejaiye et al.
Journal of Clinical Urology
Sexual function and dysfunction studies
article

British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) consensus document on male genital augmentation and enhancement procedures

Maria Satchi, Mahua Sahu, Vaibhav Modgil, Odunayo Kalejaiye, Vivekanandan Kumar, Arie Parnham, Hussain M. Alnajjar, Aditya Manjunath, Wai Gin Lee, Karen Randhawa, Mohamed Mubarak
article en

Abstract

Objective: To critically appraise the safety and efficacy of male genital augmentation and enhancement procedures, and to formulate consensus recommendations for urologists and medical professionals. Methods: A systematic search of the literature published between 2000 and 2025 was conducted. Outcomes of interest focused on penile length and girth changes, complications, and validated patient-reported outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB-2 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for non-randomised studies. Evidence was synthesised qualitatively by intervention type. Consensus recommendations were generated through structured group appraisal by the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Section of Andrology and Genitourethral Surgery (AGUS), integrating the evidence base with expert opinion, quality assessments, and patient safety considerations. Results: Thirty-six studies ( n = 3748) were included: 12 injectable fillers and 24 surgical. Injectable fillers produced short-term girth gains with mild, transient complications. Surgical procedures demonstrated modest increases in length and girth, though complicated by infection, fibrosis, and/or device removal. Across the eligible evidence, the risk of bias was high, the quality of evidence was low, and expert opinion was consistently low. Conclusion: Evidence quality remains poor, heterogeneous, and methodologically limited. As such, five key recommendations were generated by the BAUS AGUS committee on genital augmentation and enhancement with either injectable fillers or surgical procedures. Level of evidence: 2

Journal of Clinical UrologyVol. 19(2)
North Bristol NHS Trust (GB), University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (GB), Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB), University of Manchester (GB), Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Western Health and Social Care Trust (GB), King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (GB), The Christie NHS Foundation Trust (GB), University College London (GB)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 95%
Sexual function and dysfunction studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.