Non-therapeutic male circumcision in children with a novel disposable ring - Circumplast improves the outcome as compared to the standard Plastibell device at a community clinic

Dr Khan presented this study the annual congress of European Society Pediatric Urologists at Herrogate, England, UK

PURPOSE

This cohort study will evaluate the early postoperative complications in Circumplast® and Plastibell®techniques, in a community clinic, for non-therapeutic male circumcision at Thornhill clinic and Leyton clinic. 

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We reviewed the outcome of non-therapeutic male circumcision in children (n=1387) over a 1 year period (May 2014 to April 2015) in a community clinic, performed under local anaesthesia, by trained doctors with the backup of a trained paediatric surgeon. The technique was selected by doctors’ preference. Data was collected prospectively and early postoperative complications were compared between Circumplast® and Plastibell® circumcisions. Follow-up consultations were arranged if required.

RESULTS

The mean age was 18 ± 1.9 months (median 5.1) in Circumplast® circumcision (CC) and 9.4 ± 0.6 months (median 1.5) in Plastibell® circumcision (PC). Incidence of complications is significantly lower in CC (6.3% n=13/208) versus PC (13% n=154/1179) (p<0.05). Delayed ring separation/migration is significantly lower in CC (3.2% n=7/208) versus PC (8.7% n=102/1179) (p<0.05). Post-operative bleeding (0.5% vs 0.6% n= 1 vs 7), preputial adhesions (1.4% vs 2.4% n= 3 vs 28), and miscellaneous complications (0.5% vs 1% n= 1 vs 13) were lower but not statistically significant (p>0.5) in CC versus PC respectively. Postoperative use of antibiotics was higher in CC versus PC (6.7% vs 3.8% n=14 vs 45) but not statistically significant (P>0.05). In children under 6 months, the overall outcome in both groups is significantly better in comparison to 6 - 110 months old (p<0.05). Mean follow-up consultations were 19 days (range 1 to 373) in CC and 20 days (range 1 to 305) in PC.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-therapeutic male circumcision by the Circumplast® device has a significantly lower risk of early postoperative complications in a community clinic, especially migration/impaction of the ring when compared to the standard Plastibell® device.

source: ESPU 2016 website.

 

 

 

 

TESTIMONIALS

  • I visited your clinic on Monday for a circumcision operation for medical reasons. I am just writing to let you know that I thought the service you offer is excellent.

    — Peter A

  • The doctor was extremely informative and explained everything and the reason behind it.

    — Adult Patient

  • Clearly explained the procedure and after care information. Kept a relaxed atmosphere.

    — Adult patient

  • I am impressed by high standards of professionalism displayed throughout my stay here (Thornhill Circumcision Centre). Good team and God bless.

    — Father of a child, Dublin, Ireland

  • Very good manner, put me at ease through out the procedure, would definitely recommend.

    — Written by a carer, Luton

  • Excellent service Dr Khan and I will recommend to anyone who needs this services. Thank you.

    — Three sons' father, London

  • (Good) Evening Dr (Khan) just wanted to let you know that AP' ring dropped off today (day 10 post op). Thank you for your help and constant check ups. I am so pleased thank you so much.

    — AP's mother, Leyton, London

  • The doctor was extremely informative and explained everything and the reason behind it.

    — Adult patient, London

    • Dr Khan was very informative and listened to our concerns. So happy with the result

    — Mother at Thornhill Clinic, Luton
Chat on WhatsApp