Mothering Forum banner

Question on hypsodadius repair

506 Views 3 Replies 4 Participants Last post by  Frankly Speaking
I'm curious why doctors couldn't use a graft from a hip because I have a cleft palate (which is moist) no hair grows in my mouth or my hip or my gum line.

They actually took a graft from both of my hips and filled in my palate and gum line even the back of my throat. So I'm wondering why can't a hip graft instead of foreskin be used on hypospadius(sp?) when a graft from a hip work in a oral surgery ?

My son don't have that problem just wondering if anyone has an answer to that question that popped into my head.
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
That's a really interesting question - I have no idea!
It needs to be hairless. COMPLETELY hairless. The only place on the human body that hair does not grow it the soles of the feet, palms of the hand, lips, and mucous membranes. Just because the hair on your hips might be very fine, doesn't mean the hair isn't there.
Also, if a kid has hypospadias severe enough to require correction, the foreskin is normally pretty messed up anyway so a circ actually is at times a better option.
In cases of hypospadias severe enough to require surgery with skin grafts, the urethra has to be extended and that requires mucosal skin. Also, in these cases, the foreskin is not usually fully formed and covers only a part of the glans both circumferentially and distally so it is not usually functional. In these cases, there is usually not a preputial sphincter or a frenulum. If the urethral opening is below the glans on the shaft or lower, the shaft skin is pretty much unique because of the thinness and the dartos facia muscularture. The only other part of the male body that has similar skin is the eyelids and you certainly wouldn't want to give up one of those for a penis repair.

The goal of the surgery is to have a repair that looks as normal as possible and functions as close to normal as possible and the inner and outer layers of the foreskin is the only suitable donor site. This totally disregards the fact that there is a procedure that does not require any donor site tissue that is not commonly known in North America. We're still in the medical dark ages on this one. It is less invasive and thus, a faster recovery and has the same success rate as the archaic procedure commonly done here.

See less See more
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.