ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2017
[Nonretractable foreskin in boys without complaints : An indication for circumcision?]
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circumcision and its alternatives in Germany: an analysis of nationwide hospital routine data.BMC urology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRemoving boys' foreskins, even for medical reasons, is increasingly and critically discussed. The aim of this study is to retrospectively verify if the indication for the removal of boys' foreskins was justified. The study is based on the records of boys who underwent preputial operation in an outpatient medical office for pediatric surgery.
methodsPreoperative clinical findings, complaints, applied conservative and/or surgical procedures and histological results of the resected foreskins of boys, who underwent preputial operation between 2013-2015, were retrospectively analyzed.
resultsA total of 176 boys (age 5 on average) underwent a preputial operation. In 85 % of the cases it was completely removed. Most frequent clinical findings (80 %) were that the prepuce was simply not retractable. 86 % of the boys were free of complaints. The most frequent histological findings were a discrete to moderately pronounced chronic fibrous posthitis (69 %) and subepithelial fibrosis (18 %), In the first case 78 % of the boys had been free of complaints, in the latter 72 %.
conclusionThe majority of the treated boys were free of complaints; however, most of them underwent a complete removal of their foreskin simply because it was nonretractable. The foreskin represents the most sensitive part of the male genital, preputiolysis is a natural process that can go on until early adolescence. Irreversible surgical procedures, such as a complete foreskin removal, should thus be restricted to a clear medical indication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.