Literature DB >> 26797875

Application of a novel disposable suture device in circumcision: a prospective non-randomized controlled study.

Zheng Zhang1, Baibing Yang1, Wen Yu1, Youfeng Han1, Zhipeng Xu1, Hai Chen1, Yun Chen1, Yutian Dai2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the surgical effects and postoperative complications and patient experience of two circumcision methods (novel disposable suture device and conventional suture approach) in Chinese excess foreskin or phimosis patients performed in our Andrology centre in a prospective non-randomized controlled study.
METHODS: A total of 520 cases of excess foreskin and 62 phimosis patients that underwent circumcision between June 2014 and June 2015 in a single center using novel disposable device (n = 295; mean age 30.4 years, range 18-44 years) and conventional suture approach (n = 287; mean age 28.6 years, range 16-41 years) were documented. The main surgical outcomes (surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, incision healing time) and postoperative complications and patient experience (postoperative pain score, satisfaction rate of postoperative penile cosmetic appearance, recovery duration) were collected and analyzed. A multivariate logistic regression with likelihood ratio test was also used to observe the possible determinants of edema occurrence postoperatively.
RESULTS: The novel disposable suture device group had shorter operation time, lower pain score and rapid recovery and a higher satisfaction rate of penile cosmetic appearance when compared to the conventional circumcision group. Besides, the incidence of complications (hematoma and incision bleeding and infection) was significantly lower in the novel disposable suture device group. A multivariate logistic regression with likelihood ratio test revealed that phimosis was the significant predictor of edema occurrence postoperatively (Chi square of likelihood ratio = 9.88, df = 1, p = 0.025).
CONCLUSIONS: Circumcision using this novel disposable suture device is associated with short operative time, rapid recovery, less pain experience, less complications (hematoma and incision bleeding and infection) and high satisfaction rate of penile appearance. This new approach should be of value for future application. Phimosis patients should be notified that they had a great possibility to develop edema postoperatively regardless of the surgical options.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Circumcision; Edema; Excess foreskin; Novel disposable suture device; Phimosis

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26797875     DOI: 10.1007/s11255-016-1213-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol        ISSN: 0301-1623            Impact factor:   2.370


  28 in total

Review 1.  The ShangRing device for simplified adult circumcision.

Authors:  Puneet Masson; Philip S Li; Mark A Barone; Marc Goldstein
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-10-12       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  Does male circumcision affect sexual function, sensitivity, or satisfaction?--a systematic review.

Authors:  Brian J Morris; John N Krieger
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 3.802

Review 3.  [Male circumcision is an effective "surgical vaccine" for HIV prevention and reproductive health].

Authors:  Kun-Long Ben; Jian-Chun Xu; Lin Lu; Nian-Qing Lü; Yue Cheng; Jian Tao; De-Kai Liu; Xiang-Dong Min; Xiao-Mei Cao; Philip S Li
Journal:  Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue       Date:  2009-05

Review 4.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of circumcision with Shang Ring vs conventional circumcision.

Authors:  Dehong Cao; Liangren Liu; Yingchun Hu; Jia Wang; Jiuhong Yuan; Qiang Dong; Qiang Wei
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2015-02-21       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  [Shang Ring, sleeve and conventional circumcisions for redundant prepuce and phimosis: A comparative study of 918 cases].

Authors:  Rong Wang; Wei-Jun Chen; Wen-Hua Shi; Yi-Feng Xue
Journal:  Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue       Date:  2013-04

6.  Circumcision with a novel disposable device in Chinese children: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Feng Pan; Lianjun Pan; Aixia Zhang; Yong Liu; Fenglei Zhang; Yutian Dai
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2012-09-13       Impact factor: 3.369

7.  A randomized clinical study of circumcision with a ring device versus conventional circumcision.

Authors:  Cheng Yue; Yan Ze-Jun; Ke-Rong Wu; Xin-Jun Su; Jia-Sheng Hu; Jian-Wei Ma; Chuan-Min Guo; Hai-Wei Fang; Rui Su; Yao Zhang; Qing-Hua Zhang
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 8.  Circumcision for the prevention of urinary tract infection in boys: a systematic review of randomised trials and observational studies.

Authors:  D Singh-Grewal; J Macdessi; J Craig
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2005-05-12       Impact factor: 3.791

9.  [Shang Ring circumcision versus conventional circumcision for redundant prepuce or phimosis: a meta analysis].

Authors:  Er-Long Xiao; Hui Ding; Yong-Qian Li; Zhi-Ping Wang
Journal:  Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue       Date:  2013-10

Review 10.  Circumcision as a strategy to minimize HIV transmission.

Authors:  Imani Jackson Rosario; Khushabu Kasabwala; Hossein Sadeghi-Nejad
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 3.092

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.