Literature DB >> 27407673

Circumcision : A Time to Rethink.

H S Nagar1, A Chauhan2, V K Saxena3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Circumcision is one of the most routinely done surgery world over but has no scientific basis to enforce it on all patients. Of late, the operation has been criticized, non-operative methods have been tried and operations preserving the skin of prepuce have been recommended. The presence of physiological phimosis, which is self-correcting by the age of 15 years in children, needs to be differentiated from the pathological variety.
METHOD: The child population reporting to Surgery OPD was taken as sectional representative of the Indian communities and socioeconomic strata. A simple protocol was adapted to differentiate true phimosis from the physiological one and data collected. An observational study was done and data collected for last six years. RESULT: 566 children were referred to the hospital and only 212 were subjected to circumcision. Of these, 169 were cases of true phimosis, 7 had paraphimosis and the rest included 9 ritual circumcisions.
CONCLUSION: The incidence in this study is much less as compared to the series from the west. Though rare, this simple surgery is often fraught with complications. A refined approach has been planned for referring cases and selection for surgery thereby reducing unnecessary referrals and circumcisions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Circumcision; Phimosis

Year:  2011        PMID: 27407673      PMCID: PMC4923439          DOI: 10.1016/S0377-1237(04)80008-X

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India        ISSN: 0377-1237


  12 in total

1.  Phimosis in antiquity.

Authors:  F M Hodges
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  The fate of the foreskin, a study of circumcision.

Authors:  D GAIRDNER
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1949-12-24

3.  Is phimosis overdiagnosed in boys and are too many circumcisions performed in consequence?

Authors:  A M Rickwood; J Walker
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 1.891

4.  Further fate of the foreskin. Incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys.

Authors:  J Oster
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1968-04       Impact factor: 3.791

5.  Save the normal foreskin.

Authors:  A Gordon; J Collin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-01-02

6.  Phimosis in boys.

Authors:  A M Rickwood; V Hemalatha; G Batcup; L Spitz
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1980-04

7.  The incidence of phimosis in boys.

Authors:  K R Shankar; A M Rickwood
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Conservative treatment of phimosis in children using a topical steroid.

Authors:  A Orsola; J Caffaratti; J M Garat
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-08-01       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 9.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatments for phimosis: a comparison of surgical and medicinal approaches and their economic effect.

Authors:  D Berdeu; L Sauze; P Ha-Vinh; C Blum-Boisgard
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  Preputial plasty: a good alternative to circumcision.

Authors:  P M Cuckow; G Rix; P D Mouriquand
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 2.545

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.