Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39233953›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Selective Histopathology Examination for Circumcision Specimens: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Baidar Khalabazyane, Rahel Rashid, Laura Mclaren, Roza Salah, Israa Kadhmawi, Joshua Philips

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Baidar KhalabazyaneUrology, Royal Bournemouth Hospital, Bournemouth, GBR.
Rahel RashidGeneral and Colorectal Surgery, Arrowe Park Hospital, Wirral, GBR.
Laura MclarenUrology, Royal Bournemouth Hospital, Bournemouth, GBR.
Roza SalahPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Salisbury Foundation Trust, Bournemouth, GBR.
Israa KadhmawiMedicine, Arrowe Park Hospital, Wirral, GBR.
Joshua PhilipsUrology, Royal Bournemouth Hospital, Bournemouth, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Circumcision is a widely performed surgical procedure all over the globe. This can be for religious, cultural, or medical reasons. Routine histological examination of circumcision specimens is a standard practice in many healthcare systems, despite the relatively low incidence of premalignant or malignant lesions. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the necessity of routine histopathological examination of foreskin specimens following adult circumcision. Secondary objectives included determining the frequency of malignancy in these specimens, comparing malignancy rates between clinically suspicious and non-suspicious cases, and assessing the correlation between preoperative clinical suspicion and histopathological findings. Aim This study aimed to evaluate the necessity of routine histopathological evaluation for the foreskin after circumcision. We investigated the frequency of malignancy upon histopathological examination, in clinically suspicious cases compared to non-suspicious cases. Method A retrospective observational study was conducted at the Royal Bournemouth Hospital, analyzing data from 334 consecutive adult male patients who underwent circumcision between January 2012 and December 2016. The cohort was retrospectively divided into two groups: those with preoperative suspicious clinical features and those without it. Clinical records on electronic patient records (EPR) were used for follow-up and to identify the percentage of malignancy after final histopathological examinations in both groups. Results Among the 334 patients, only nine patients (2.7%) were deemed as having suspicious clinical features preoperatively, of which, only three (0.9% of the total study sample) showed malignancy upon histological examination. The other six patients in this group were found to have balanitis xerotica obliterans (BXO). The other 325 patients (97.3%) were without clinically suspicious lesions preoperatively, and none were found to have any malignant lesions upon histopathological examination. Conclusion The low incidence of malignancy in circumcision specimens indicates that routine histological examination may not be essential for all cases. Among 334 samples, only three (0.9%) were malignant, and all were clinically suspected. Routine histopathological examination of the remaining 331 cases did not impact management or follow-up. Selectively submitting specimens for histology based on clinical suspicion could reduce opportunity costs and time, optimize resource allocation, and maintain appropriate diagnostic evaluation.

Indexed as

balanitis xerotica obliterans (bxo)foreskin histologylichen sclerosusmale circumcisionparaphimosispenile cancerphimosis

Identifiers

PMID39233953
PMCPMC11372335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.