Literature DB >> 20434760

Adult template circumcision: a prospective, randomized, patient-blinded, comparative study evaluating the safety and efficacy of a novel circumcision device.

Brian Decastro1, Jennifer Gurski, Andrew Peterson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: In 2001, we reported a novel technique for pediatric circumcision that has proved to be fast, reliable, and safe during the past 4 years, with good cosmetic results. Inspired by our success with this technique, we have created a similar device to be used for adults.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, patient-blinded study to compare this device with that of the standard sleeve circumcision. A total of 30 men were randomized to undergo a standard sleeve or template circumcision. They completed the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire before the procedure. We prospectively evaluated the differences in procedure time, patient satisfaction, blood loss, and local anesthetic use between the 2 groups. The patients returned 8-10 weeks later for physical examination and completion of a postprocedure Male Sexual Health Questionnaire and patient satisfaction questionnaire.
RESULTS: Of the 30 enrolled patients, 14 underwent standard sleeve circumcision, and 16 underwent template circumcision. Two patients in the sleeve group moved from the area after circumcision and were lost to follow-up, leaving 28 patients available for review at the 8-10-week appointment. The duration of the procedure was significantly shorter in the template group (27.5 minutes) than in the sleeve circumcision group (36.0 minutes; P = .001). No significant differences were noted between the 2 groups with regard to blood loss, amount of local anesthetic used, patient satisfaction, or change in sexual health, as defined by the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of the adult circumcision template appears to be a reliable and safe method of circumcision that significantly reduces the operative time. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20434760     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.02.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  5 in total

1.  The characteristics of circular disposable devices and in situ devices for optimizing male circumcision: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yu Fan; Dehong Cao; Qiang Wei; Zhuang Tang; Ping Tan; Lu Yang; Liangren Liu; Zhenhua Liu; Xiang Li; Wenbin Xue
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  Shang Ring versus forceps-guided adult male circumcision: a randomized, controlled effectiveness study in southwestern Uganda.

Authors:  Samuel Kanyago; David M Riding; Elichum Mutakooha; Alcides Lopez de la O; Mark J Siedner
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 3.731

3.  Circumcision devices versus standard surgical techniques in adolescent and adult male circumcisions.

Authors:  Ameer Hohlfeld; Sumayyah Ebrahim; Muhammed Zaki Shaik; Tamara Kredo
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-03-31

Review 4.  Male circumcision for HIV prevention: current evidence and implementation in sub-Saharan Africa.

Authors:  Richard G Wamai; Brian J Morris; Stefan A Bailis; David Sokal; Jeffrey D Klausner; Ross Appleton; Nelson Sewankambo; David A Cooper; John Bongaarts; Guy de Bruyn; Alex D Wodak; Joya Banerjee
Journal:  J Int AIDS Soc       Date:  2011-10-20       Impact factor: 5.396

Review 5.  Clinical trials using the Shang Ring device for male circumcision in Africa: a review.

Authors:  Mark A Barone; Philip S Li; Quentin D Awori; Richard Lee; Marc Goldstein
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2014-03
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.