4.4 Article

Medicolegal evaluation of the erectile function of patients referred from the Forensic Medicine Authority of the Ministry of Justice in Upper Egypt

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.14252

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study highlights a variety of cases referred for medicolegal evaluation in Upper Egypt, with erectile dysfunction being the most common issue. A more meticulous and well-designed approach is necessary for the evaluation of these patients, as serious legal consequences can result from this evaluation.
Objectives In Upper Egypt, the Forensic Medicine Authority of the Ministry of Justice transfers patients with marital conflicts or accusation of rape for proper sexual function evaluation, which helps in making its decisions according to the law. Therefore, our study aims to evaluate the pattern of 40 cases referred for sexual function evaluation, their clinical, laboratory, imaging characteristics and finally the decisions of these cases. Methods The study included 40 patients who referred from the Forensic Medicine Authority for erectile function evaluation. Initial evaluation was done through history taking, general & genital examination. Hormonal profile including total testosterone, free testosterone, follicle stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, prolactin, estradiol and random blood sugar were done. Penile color doppler with intracorporeal injection of PGE1 was done. Results The final decision for erectile function cases was considered as normal evaluation, venogenic, arteriogenic, and psychogenic erectile dysfunction were 35% (14/40), 25% (10/40), 15% (6/40) and 12.5% (5/40), respectively. Conclusions There is a great diversity in patients referred for medicolegal evaluation in Upper Egypt; with the erectile function problems are the commonest. A more meticulous well-designed approach is needed for proper evaluation of those patients as serious legal consequences result from this evaluation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available