Need advice on second biopsy / penile inflammation as the cause of my Peyronies

[bentoboy]

Hi there,

I need your advice on something. Shortly speaking, I believe the main cause of my Peyronies is the penile inflammation that started in 2020. Once upon a time, on a lovely day, I got some whitish spots on my glans, which initially looked completely innocuous, but later got inflamed and spread all across the glans over time. Having done tens of different blood/urine/swab tests (plus penile biopsy), all of the results came back negative, so it was impossible to know the cause.

I cured the problem by having a circumcision. The inflammation went away, the bright spots/lesions tarnished, and the situation was more or less alright. Well, then I got Peyronies which was even worse (although some of my doctors suggested that those lesions could have been Lichen sclerosis which is also quite scary).

A few months ago, I noticed that every time I ejaculate, the glans look bizarre – whitish/greyish spots/patches appear all across the glans, which go away within 15 minutes. My dermatologist confirmed that it was bizarre but suggested that I should not worry too much if the spots quickly go away.

So, I've been thinking about the following. What if there is some connection between this chronic inflammation, spots and my Peyronies? Even though the inflammation seems to have disappeared, there are still those white/grey lesions I mentioned. Might it indicate some low-grade inflammation, perhaps? If that is the case, then it may be connected to my Peyronies.

Do you think it would be a good idea to have a second biopsy done? My dermatologist said that, first, it is a super safe procedure, and second, it may make sense to have it done if the first biopsy was done two years ago... (meaning that the tissue of the glans might have changed over time) although my other dermatologist said that there is not much sense to having a second biopsy unless there are clear signs of inflammation (in my case they saw some inflammation, some problems but it was inconclusive - 'within a norm').

Do you think I should have a second biopsy done? Just to make sure that there is no inflammation (also, for the first biopsy, the sample was taken from one of those inflamed areas. However,  I think the doctor should have taken it from the most inflamed spot, basically where the inflammation started and where those lesions are visible the most)

Thanks