Trial reportInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
Novel penile circumcision suturing devices versus the shang ring for adult male circumcision: a prospective study.
Trial report in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Wound healing rates and wound problems of conventional circumcision compared with ring circumcision: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- Phimosis in Adults: Narrative Review of the New Available Devices and the Standard Treatments.Clinics and practice · 2024Review
- Optimizing treatment strategies for pediatric phimosis and redundant prepuce: a comparative study of traditional circumcision and disposable circumcision stapler.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
- A Retrospective Taiwanese-Population-Based Clinical Study on Determining the Efficacy and Safety of Disposable Circumcision Anastomat.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel penile circumcision suturing devices PCSD and Shang ring (SR) for circumcision in an adult population. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 124 outpatients were randomly assigned to receive PCSD (n=62) or SR (n=62). Patient characteristics, operative time, blood loss, return to normal activities time (RNAT), visual analogue scale (VAS), scar width, wound healing time, cosmetic result, and complications were recorded.
resultsThere were no significant differences in blood loss, RNAT, or complications between the two groups. There were no significant differences in the VAS scores at theduring operation, and 6 or 24 hours after surgery (P>0.05). The wound scar width was wider in the SR group than in the PCSD group (P<0.01). Patients in the SR group had significantly longer wound healing time compared with those in the PCSD group (P<0.01). Patients who underwent PCSD wereere significantly more satisfied with the cosmetic results (P<0.01).
conclusionsSR and PCSD are safe and effective minimally invasive techniques for adult male circumcision. Compared with SRs, PCSDs have the advantages of faster postoperative incision healing and a good effect on wound cosmetics.
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.