ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MALE CIRCUMCISION TECHNIQUES: A LITERATURE REVIEW

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

PDF
Published 2021-01-15
Andersen Felicia Adelina Shannen Ridwan Mataram

Abstract

Objective: To compare the advantages and disadvantages of male circumcision techniques. The articles of male circumcision techniques were investigated from October 2018 to December 2018 through Google Scholar and Proquest. Material & Methods: There are various methods of circumcision, these methods can be grouped into two: using shield and clamp devices and conventional methods (dorsal slit and excision). Results: The result from this review article are the technique using shield and clamp devices such as the Smart Klamp have several advantages, that are minimal bleeding, rarely injuring the glans penis and faster, but the disadvantage is taken more costs, and often occurs edema in the circumcision area. Conclusion: In general, the circumcision method using shield and clamp devices is more beneficial and more practical than conventional methods. 


##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

circumcision, devices, male, shield and clamp, techniques

References

Moses S, Bailey RC, Ronald AR. Male circumcision: assessment of health benefits and risks. Sex. Transm. Infect. 1998; 74: 368–373.

Blank S, Brady M, Buerk E, Carlo W, Diekema D, Freedman A, et al. American Academy of Pediatrics, Task force on Circumcision: Male circumcision. Pediatrics. 2012; 130: e756–85.

Gerharz EW, Haarmann C. The first cut is the deepest? Medicolegal aspects of male circumcision. BJU Int. 2000; 86: 332–8.

Rickwood AM. Medical indications for circumcision. BJU Int. 1999; 83: 45–51.

Morris BJ. Why circumcision is a biomedical imperative for the 21(st) century. Bioessays 2007; 29: 1147–1158.

Bitega JP, Ngeruka ML, Hategekimana T, Asiimwe A, Binagwaho A. Safety and efficacy of the PrePex device for rapid scale-up of male circumcision for HIV prevention in resource-limited settings. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2011; 58: e127–34.

U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Background, methods, and synthesis of scientific information used to inform the "Recommendations for providers counseling male patients and parents regarding male circumcision and the prevention of HIV infection, STIs, and other health outcomes." [Docket No. CDC-2014-0012-0002]. https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CDC-2014-0012-0002 (Accessed September 14, 2018).

Gerharz EW, Haarmann C. The first cut is the deepest? Medicolegal aspects of male circumcision. BJU Int. 2000; 86: 332–8.

Kaplan GW. Complications of circumcision. Urol Clin North Am. 1983; 10: 543–9.

Brown TC. The anatomy and technique of penile block. Update Anaesth. 1993; 2: 11–2.

Geneva: World Health Organization. WHO/UNAIDS/JHPIEGO. Manual for male circumcision under local anaesthesia (accessed 2018).

Peng Y, Masson P, Li PS, Chang Y, Tian L, Lee R, et al. No-needle local anesthesia for adult male circumcision. J Urol. 2010; 184: 978–83.

Weiss H, Polonsky J, Bailey R, Hankins C, Halperin D, Schmid G. Male circumcision: Global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety and acceptability. World Health Organization and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). Available from: http://data.unaids.org/pub/Report/2007/jc1360_male_circumcision_en.pdf. (accessed Dec 01, 2018).

Barrie H, Huntingford PJ, Gough MH. The plastibell technique for circumcision. BMJ. 1965; 2: 273–5.

Reichman EF. Emergency Medicine Procedures. 2nd Ed. 2013. Available from: www.accessemergencymedicines.com (accessed Dec 03, 2018).

Circumcision Clinic Cardiff. Circumcision Methods. 2015. Available from: http://www.circumcisionincardiff.co.uk/circumcision-methods/ (accessed Dec 03, 2018)

Pan F, Pan L, et al. Circumcision with a novel disposable device in Chinese children: A randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Urology. 2012. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2012.03132.x (accessed Dec 05, 2019).

Goldman R, Montagu A. Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma. How an American Cultural Practice Affects infants and Ultimately Us All. Available from: https://circumcision.org/gomco-clamp/ (accessed Dec 05, 2018).

Doctorlib. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 7 Ed. Chapter 10. Immediate Care of the Newborn. 2017. Available from: https://doctorlib.info/gynecology/obstetrics-gynecology/10.html (accessed Dec 05, 2018).

Ahmed AA, Mungadi IA. Techniques of Male Circumcision. J Surg Tech Case Rep. 2013; 5(1): 1–7.

Karadag MA, et al. SmartClamp circumcision versus conventional dissection technique in terms of parental anxiety and outcomes: A prospective clinical study. Can Urol Assoc J. 2015; 9(1-2): E10–E13.

Prepex. Clinical Procedure. PrePex Non-Surgical Male Circumcision Procedure for Adults and Adolescents. 2018. Available from: http://prepex.com/device-overview/clinical-procedure/ (accessed Dec 06, 2019).

Minja M, et al. Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care. 2016; 27(6): 784-791.

Schutte, et al. Comparative Cost Analysis of Surgical and PrePex Device Male Circumcision in Zimbabwe and Mozambique. JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes. 2016; 72: 96-100.

Section
Articles
Copyright Information
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine/Airlangga University