ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Time to rethink routine histopathology after adult circumcision? Long-term oncological outcomes from an 11-year cohort.
Article in World journal of urology, 2026. 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
purposeTo evaluate whether routine histopathological examination of the prepuce following adult circumcision without clinical suspicion of malignancy influences patient management and healthcare resource utilisation, and to report circumcision frequency and long-term oncological outcomes.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted of all adult circumcisions performed between January 2015 and December 2025. Patients aged ≥ 15 years undergoing circumcision for symptomatic phimosis, paraphimosis, or recurrent balanitis were included. Cases with suspected malignancy or known premalignant lesions were excluded. Demographic, operative, histopathological, and follow-up data were extracted from electronic records. Median follow-up was 85 months. Cost analysis was based on an estimated histopathology cost of £226 per specimen.
resultsOf 1,648 listed patients, 1,523 met the inclusion criteria (median age 44 years). Phimosis was the primary indication (98.2%). Lichen sclerosus was identified in 62% of specimens, while incidental penile intraepithelial neoplasia (PeIN) was detected in 0.5%. No invasive carcinomas were identified. All PeIN cases were managed with circumcision alone, and no progression or additional intervention was required at a median follow-up of 81 months. Eliminating routine histopathology would have saved 304.6 consultant hours and £344,198 over 11 years (£31,291 annually).
conclusionsIn the absence of clinical suspicion, routine histopathological examination of the prepuce rarely detects clinically significant malignancy or alters management. A selective, risk-adapted approach may optimise resource utilisation while maintaining oncological safety.
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.