ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Examination of short and long term complications of thermocautery, plastic clamping, and surgical circumcision techniques.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thermocautery for infantile circumcision in high-volume hospitals: a retrospective analysis of over 1,500 cases.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and early complications of conventional circumcision techniques and thermocautery-assisted circumcision.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Parental traditional medicine use for children and associated factors in Harar City, Harari Regional State, Eastern Ethiopia: a community-based cross-sectional study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Review
- Systematic review of complications arising from male circumcision.BJUI compass · 2022Review
- Examination of short and long term complications of thermocautery, plastic clamping, and surgical circumcision techniques.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
- Reliability of thermocautery-assisted circumcision: retrospective analysis of circumcision performed voluntarily in countries of low socioeconomic status.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn this study, thermocautery, plastic clamping, and conventional (open surgical) circumcision techniques were compared in terms of their complications.
methodsMale patients who underwent circumcisions between May 2014 and May 2015 in two separate pediatric surgery clinics were retrospectively analyzed using the hospital registry system. These patients were evaluated in terms of age, accompanying pathologies, anesthesia techniques, complication rates, duration of surgery, and circumcision techniques. A statistical analysis of the data was performed, with a P<0.05 considered to be statistically significant.
resultsThe patients were divided into three groups according to the circumcision method: conventional surgical circumcision (n=833), thermocautery (n=1011), and plastic clamp (n=218). Complications were observed in 21 cases (1%): bleeding (11), infection (2), trapped penis (6), meatitis (1), and scrotal injury (1). There were significantly fewer complications in the thermocautery technique when compared to the clamping and surgical circumcision techniques. The plastic clamping and thermocautery techniques were superior to a surgical circumcision in terms of the operation time.
conclusionThe thermocautery circumcision technique can be used easily in both the operating theatre and in designated circumcision rooms, with a lower complication rate, when compared to plastic clamping and surgical circumcisions.
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.