[ ARC forum 2 ]

Re: Fraenuloplasty vs. fraenulum division

Written by Steven at 09 Jan 2002 18:49:22:

As an answer to: Fraenuloplasty vs. fraenulum division written by Paul B. at 09 Jan 2002 11:24:04:

Fraenulum division simply means cutting it from the edge to the base of the web. It may well not be stitched (bleeding stopped by diathermy or simple crushing), though that would heal a little quicker. If the surgeon thinks that division will leave a tag on either side, he will cut out a piece as a semicircular wedge, and probably stitch the line remaining.
A Z-plasty is a procedure which lengthens in one direction at the expense of the opposite direction (another version is a V-Y plasty which is symmetrical, Z-plasty is not) and may help to avoid uncomfortable stress being placed on the apex of the removed wedge.
I suspect the differences are subtle anyway. For those that are concerned about damage to nerves, the "plasty" does at least as much damage, perhaps more since the cuts to mobilise the flap for movement, are wider. But then I'm not convinced whether this matters much, since the fraenulum is a midline structure and should have few nerves.

>Paul - thanks for all the info -- bottom line is that I should have plenty to >discuss with the urologist I guess.
>Am I to assume, reading between the lines, that all the above procedures are >legitimate solutions for a short frenulum and that, hopefully, the surgeon >will perform which ever one is most appropriate in a particular case, OR are >some procedures better than others, either in terms of 'solution' >or 'cosmetics/healing'. I would hate to think that I might just receive what a >surgeon happens to know or prefer rather than what is best in my case. If I >know what might be the better options, perhaps I can least ask why they might >be foresaken for another procedure.

> ps. ... I always had the condition but just 'lived with it'
So do tell, just how much trouble has it caused you?

>Hmmm -- well, I'm 39 so I have lived with this for some time. To be honest >tho', when you assume you have nothing wrong, you don't tend to be thinking >too much about how things could be different - and what you might be missing! >I also think that my particular case is perhaps 'milder' than what I have read >of some of the difficulties of others. Intercourse itself has always been very >satisfying for me. Without wishing to spark any circ versus non-circ debate, >perhaps the supposed increased sensitivity of being 'intact' means I am happy >with a less vigorous form of sex than 'normal' and so I haven't been taxing my >equipment so much! -- regardless, and ironically I guess, it has only been >since I have been aware of my condition that I have been more prone to 'hold >back' -- psychosexual effects of thinking about torn frenulums I guess!

>I also know, from odd occasions when my foreskin has become trapped behind the >glans (a different condition I know), that my foreskin is certainly capable of >that level of retraction, given enough lubrication I guess and despite the >short frenulum -- but I suspect that a lot of the time, intercourse has taken >place without that level of retraction/amount of movement.

>As for other things, particularly oral sex, then yes I think I have been >missing out :( --However, I think my condition has been getting progressively >worse since, although I have always known I was 'sensitive' down there, I can >certainly recall a few 'rough' skirmishes in the past. Certainly since knowing >of my condition (1 year ago), I am definetly more hesitant.
>Anyway, I am hoping that some form of minor surgery (SOON!) will solve my
>problem and remove both the pain, and anxiety !


Answers: