ArticleBMC urology2024
Spectrum and the management of glanular-preputial adhesions after ritual male circumcision.
Article in BMC urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundComplications after male circumcision are numerous and may be presented as an adhesion between the glans penis and the preputial remnants, these adhesions may acquire different forms and troublesome the affected children. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis is a retrospective study of 95 consecutive children of presumed glanular-preputial adhesions referred for correction of circumcision. They were assessed and classified as having either an early preputial adhesion or a well-formed skin bridge into 2 groups; group (A) who have a simple adhesion that was resolved through a conservative preputial adhesiolysis while those in the group (B) had a well-formed skin bridge, which deserves surgical correction. Histopathology done for 30 cases from group B. All cases were followed up till resolution of the adhesion.
resultsA wide diversity of the Glanular-Preputial Adhesions (GPA) was recognized with a different form ranged from a simple fibrinous adhesion which was diagnosed in 55 cases (group A), these adhesions were resolved with medical treatment, and a well-formed single or multiple skin bridges formed 3-4 months after circumcision; which were detected in 40 patients (group B) with a smegma pearls in 15, all required a surgical adhesiolysis. Mean age of patients was 3 years (6 months to 12 years). Three cases were diagnosed with penile scleroatrophic lichen balanitis.
conclusionGlanular-Preputial Adhesions is not a rare complication after MC. It could be a simple fibrinous; which resolves with topical corticosteroid or a well-formed skin bridge which needs surgical adhesiolysis.
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.