ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2021
Circumcision with plastic Alisclamp technique in 4733 boys: our experiences to reduce complications
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circumcision with a novel metallic disposable clamp (AlisklampPediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Alisklamp versus Conventional Dorsal Slit Circumcision: A Multicentric Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of two methods in circumcision: a new disposable device versus classic sleeve technique.BMC urology · 2024Article
- What is a vulva?Anatomical science international · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: We aim to report the outcomes of circumcisions performed with Alisclamp and our experiences to reduce the complications. Material and methods: Complications among circumcised males with Alisclamp between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 (n = 1429); patients circumcised in 2015–2016 and Group 2 (n = 3304); patients circumcised in 2017–2018. The different technical approaches in Group 2 are as follows: 1) Prevention of bleeding: In Group 2, we didn’t pull the ventral prepuce to reduce the risk of frenulum injury and the foreskin was excised approximately 1–2 mm above the base. 2) Prevention of secondary phimosis: In Group 2, regular manual pressure had been applied to mons pubis and we postponed some of the overweight children’s circumcision. 3) Prevention of excessive foreskin: The clamp was placed carefully to prevent the glans from moving back and forth. Results: Secondary phimosis was significantly lower in Group 2 (p = 0.003). Total bleeding and bleeding requiring suturing were significantly lower in Group 2 (p = 0.001 and p = 0.026, respectively). Conclusion: Technique-specific complications of Alisclamp can reduce with technique-specific modifications.
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.