Literature DB >> 18947698

Y-V plasty of the foreskin as an alternative to circumcision for surgical treatment of phimosis during childhood.

Jaap L Nieuwenhuijs1, Pieter Dik, Aart J Klijn, Tom P V M de Jong.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the result of Y-V preputioplasty and to compare this with an earlier technique of prepuce-sparing phimosis treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 65 boys were treated surgically for phimosis without removing the foreskin. Indications were the failure of conservative ointment treatment, congenital uropathies (to prevent infections and to make proper cleaning of the glans and the inner preputium possible to ensure clean urine sampling), recurrent balanitis or painful ballooning of the prepuce, and/or the need for urethral instrumentation. Forty-seven patients were treated with one or two Y-V plasties to widen the narrow preputial ring; 18 were treated using transverse closure of longitudinal incisions of the narrow preputial ring.
RESULTS: Of the 47 Y-V plasties, two patients had recurring complaints and needed further treatment (4.3%), and of the 18 patients treated by transversely closed longitudinal incisions, two patients had recurring complaints (11%). Recurrences occurred regardless of age and premedication with topical therapy. Cosmesis was considered to be excellent in all cases of Y-V plasty. Few patients complained about skin tags after longitudinal incisions.
CONCLUSION: Y-V plasty of the preputial skin as an alternative to circumcision in the treatment of phimosis has good functional and cosmetic results. It is a minor operation with less impact on the penis than partial or total circumcision. The cosmetic results are superior to those after transversely closed longitudinal incisions.

Entities:  

Year:  2006        PMID: 18947698     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2006.01.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pediatr Urol        ISSN: 1477-5131            Impact factor:   1.830


  5 in total

Review 1.  [Current and practice-relevant news from pediatric urology].

Authors:  R Stein; A Schröder; M Goepel
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  Benign penile skin anomalies in children: a primer for pediatricians.

Authors:  Marco Castagnetti; Mike Leonard; Luis Guerra; Ciro Esposito; Marcello Cimador
Journal:  World J Pediatr       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 2.764

3.  Acceptability and outcomes of foreskin preservation for phimosis: An Indian perspective.

Authors:  B S Balaji; Tarun John K Jacob; M S Gowri
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2020-05-31

Review 4.  Preputioplasty as a surgical alternative in treatment of phimosis.

Authors:  Daniar Osmonov; Claudius Hamann; Ahmed Eraky; Almut Kalz; Diethild Melchior; Robert Bergholz; Javier Romero-Otero
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 2.408

5.  Preputialplasty: can be considered an alternative to circumcision? When, how, why? Experience of Italian centre.

Authors:  Rossella Angotti; Francesco Molinaro; Francesco Ferrara; Chiara Pellegrino; Edoardo Bindi; Giulia Fusi; Mario Messina
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2018-04
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.