ReviewInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
Safety, Complications, and Procedural Efficiency of Neonatal Circumcision Devices: A Network Meta-Analysis.
Review in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to compare safety, complications, and procedural characteristics of commonly used circumcision devices in neonates and early infants.
methodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and SCOPUS through January 2026 for randomized controlled trials comparing infant circumcision devices (Plastibell™, Mogen™, ShangRing™, AccuCirc™) in infants ≤3 months. The primary outcome was total adverse events; secondary outcomes included bleeding, infection, redundant skin, adhesions, parental satisfaction, and procedure time. A random-effects network meta-analysis estimated relative effects with 95% confidence intervals (CI), using Gomco™ or Mogen™ as reference devices. Analyses were performed in R.
resultsTen trials including 3,984 infants from Africa, the Middle East, and the United States were analyzed. No device differed significantly from Gomco™ in total adverse events: Plastibell™ (risk ratios, [RR] 1.53, 95% CI 0.56-4.21), ShangRing™ (RR 2.70, 95% CI 0.31-23.66), Mogen™ (RR 3.83, 95% CI 0.97-15.17), and AccuCirc™ (RR 9.62, 95% CI 0.24-388.45). Plastibell™ was associated with a higher infection risk versus Gomco™ (RR 4.25, 95% CI 1.43-12.65). No significant differences were observed in bleeding, redundant skin, adhesions, or parental satisfaction. Mogen™ and ShangRing™ had shorter procedure times than Gomco™ (mean difference [MD] -3.29 minutes, 95% CI -4.82 to -1.76; MD -3.39 minutes, 95% CI -6.11 to -0.67).
conclusionsNeonatal circumcision devices demonstrate generally comparable safety profiles, though Plastibell™ carries elevated infection risk. Mogen™ and ShangRing™ offer procedural efficiency advantages. Device selection should prioritize provider expertise, infection control capabilities, and programmatic efficiency requirements alongside safety considerations.
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.