ArticleInternational journal of impotence research2025
A novel circumcision technique for adult phimosis combining three techniques: a retrospective comparative study.
Article in International journal of impotence research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efficiency and Patient Satisfaction of Local Anesthesia Use in Surgical Circumcision in Adults-A Retrospective Cohort Study.BioMed research international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We presented a novel circumcision technique for adult phimosis that combines the advantages of three circumcision methods-dorsal slit, guillotine, and sleeve (DGS)-while modifying technical details, referred to as the modified DGS technique. This retrospective comparative trial enrolled 483 adult males with phimosis undergoing circumcision between March 1, 2018 and March 1, 2024 at our hospital. The patients were divided into the modified DGS technique group (n = 151) and control (dorsal slit technique) group (n = 332) according to their preferences. Postoperative complications, surgical duration, and satisfaction with penile appearance were compared. The overall complication rate was 2.6% in the modified DGS group and 11.1% in the control group (p = 0.0019). The mean surgical duration was 36.8 ± 11.5 min for the modified DGS group and 35.2 ± 8.9 min for the control group (p = 0.0964). The modified DGS group exhibited a significantly lower dissatisfaction rate regarding overall penile appearance compared to the control group (2.6% versus 18.1%, p < 0.0001) as assessed by the postoperative follow-up questionnaire. The modified DGS technique, compared with the dorsal slit approach, can be used for phimosis with a similar surgical duration. It demonstrates fewer complications and better cosmetic 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.