Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42310587›Full record

ArticleBMC pediatrics2026

A novel non-invasive technique for pediatric phimosis treatment: assessing efficacy and post-treatment family care - a retrospective cohort study.

Xia Zhao, Li Zhang, Nan Jin

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Xia ZhaoDepartment of Pediatrics, The Ninth Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, No. 9, Anxiangbei Lane, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100101, China.
Li ZhangDepartment of Pediatrics Outpatient and Emergency, the Seventh Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100700, China.
Nan JinDepartment of Pediatrics, The Ninth Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, No. 9, Anxiangbei Lane, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100101, China. 13012255765@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe European Association of Urology 2024-2025 guidelines recommend conservative management as first-line therapy for pediatric phimosis before considering surgical intervention. Balloon catheter dilation treatment (BCDT) has emerged as a promising foreskin-preserving approach, yet high-quality comparative evidence against conventional circumcision (CC) remains limited. This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy, safety outcomes, and family-centered measures between BCDT and CC in a pediatric cohort.

methodsThis retrospective cohort study enrolled 200 boys (aged 2-12 years) with Kikiros grade ≥ 2 phimosis treated between January and December 2024 at a tertiary pediatric surgery center. Patients were allocated to BCDT (n = 100) or CC (n = 100) groups based on treatment received. Primary outcomes included cure rates (Kikiros grade 0-1) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes encompassed procedure-related parameters, complication rates, pain assessment using the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) scale, healing time, parent-reported satisfaction, and health literacy-associated compliance measures. Propensity score analysis confirmed baseline comparability. Number needed to treat (NNT) and effect sizes (Cohen's d) were calculated to quantify clinical significance.

resultsBoth treatments achieved high 6-month cure rates (BCDT: 98.0% vs. CC: 100.0%; P = 0.497; absolute risk difference: 2.0%, 95% CI: -0.7% to 4.7%). BCDT demonstrated substantial advantages in procedure efficiency (mean operative time: 5.03 ± 0.62 vs. 29.38 ± 6.69 min; P < 0.001; Cohen's d=-5.13) and recovery parameters (healing time: 6.74 ± 2.13 vs. 15.90 ± 3.06 days; P < 0.001; Cohen's d=-3.47). Pain-related outcomes significantly favored BCDT: lower incidence (65.0% vs. 99.0%; P < 0.001; NNT = 3), shorter duration (21.2 ± 14.0 vs. 93.2 ± 55.6 h; P < 0.001), and reduced FLACC scores at 24 h (2.59 ± 1.44 vs. 5.22 ± 2.07; P < 0.001; Cohen's d=-1.48). Edema occurrence was substantially lower in the BCDT group (60.0% vs. 100.0%; P < 0.001; NNT = 2.5). Parent satisfaction rates (score 5, very satisfied) were 96.0% and 88.0% for BCDT and CC, respectively (P = 0.068). Parent health literacy (Newest Vital Sign score) positively correlated with home care compliance (r = 0.42; P < 0.001), with adequate literacy (NVS ≥ 4) associated with significantly better adherence (3.21 ± 0.58 vs. 2.74 ± 0.71; P < 0.001).

conclusionsIn this retrospective cohort, BCDT achieved short-term (6-month) cure rates non-inferior to CC while offering clinically meaningful advantages in procedural simplicity (6-fold reduction in operative time), pain mitigation (34% absolute reduction in incidence), accelerated healing (2.4-fold faster), and enhanced parent satisfaction. As a foreskin-preserving, minimally invasive option requiring only topical anaesthesia, BCDT may be considered for carefully selected symptomatic children with pathological phimosis, within a stepwise conservative management strategy that includes watchful waiting and topical corticosteroids as first-line therapy. Routine intervention for asymptomatic physiological phimosis is not supported by these data, and durable cure, long-term recurrence prevention, and broad first-line adoption require confirmation in prospectively designed studies with follow-up extending beyond puberty. Outcomes are optimised when supported by adequate parent health literacy for post-procedure home-care adherence.

Indexed as

PhimosisChildChild, PreschoolCircumcision, MaleHumansMalePatient SatisfactionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBalloon catheter dilationCircumcisionForeskin preservationHealth literacyMinimally invasive treatmentPatient-reported outcomesPediatric urologyPhimosis

Identifiers

PMID42310587
PMCPMC13520312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.