ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2025
Efficacy analysis of modified circumcision in the treatment of pediatric concealed penis.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Standardized technique of concealed penis remains undefined due to the high incidence of postoperative complications. This study aimed to introduce a novel modified circumcision for pediatric concealed penis and evaluate its efficacy in reducing complications. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study in patients with concealed penis in our center during 2013 to 2023. Our modified technique improved circumcision through penile degloving, selective penoscrotal angle reconstruction, and graded preservation of inner preputial lamina according to penile concealment severity. The study group (n=53) comprised two subgroups: subgroup 1 (n=20, mild/moderate cases) received modified circumcision with 5-9 mm inner preputial lamina preservation, whereas subgroup 2 (n=33, severe cases) underwent additional penoscrotal angle reconstruction with 10-20 mm inner preputial lamina preservation. The control group (n=64) received classic Devine technique. The therapeutic effect and complications were compared using the Chi-squared or Student's t-test. Results: The study group demonstrated shorter operation time and lower incidences of preputial edema, preputial redundancy, and penile retraction (P<0.05). The study group achieved greater penile length above baseline skin level (BPL) (3.17±0.89 Conclusions: The modified circumcision effectively treats concealed penis with minimal invasiveness, reduced complication risks, and improved penile aesthetic outcomes. It provides individualized treatment according to penile concealment severity.
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.