ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2024
Optimizing treatment strategies for pediatric phimosis and redundant prepuce: a comparative study of traditional circumcision and disposable circumcision stapler.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A novel non-invasive technique for pediatric phimosis treatment: assessing efficacy and post-treatment family care - a retrospective cohort study.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Efficacy analysis of modified circumcision in the treatment of pediatric concealed penis.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the surgical outcomes and complication rates of traditional circumcision and disposable circumcision stapler in the treatment of pediatric patients with phimosis and redundant prepuce. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on pediatric patients with phimosis or preputial redundancy treated at our pediatric surgery department from January 2022 to December 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: treated with traditional circumcision (control group) and treated with a disposable circumcision stapler (experimental group). Surgical parameters (operation time, intraoperative bleeding), postoperative outcomes (postoperative pain scores, wound healing time, severe edge swelling, wound dehiscence, postoperative rebleeding, postoperative infection, aesthetic satisfaction), were compared between the two groups. Results: A total of 301 pediatric patients were included in our study, with 146 in the traditional group and 155 in the stapler group. The stapler group showed significantly lower values in operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative rebleeding compared to the traditional group ( Conclusion: In the treatment of pediatric phimosis and redundant prepuce, the advantage of traditional circumcision lies in faster postoperative recovery and less severe edge swelling. The disposable circumcision stapler excels in thorough hemostasis, easy and safe operation, suitable for primary medical use, but lags behind in postoperative recovery compared to the traditional method. Each treatment approach has its own advantages, and the choice should be based on the actual condition and circumstances of the patient. Personalized treatment decisions should be made collaboratively to achieve the best therapeutic outcomes.
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.