A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Netto,Jose Murillo Bastos
Data de Publicação: 2013
Outros Autores: Araujo Jr.,Jose Goncalves de, Noronha,Marcos Flavio de Almeida, Passos,Bruno Rezende, Lopes,Humberto Elias, Bessa Jr.,Jose de, Figueiredo,Andre Avarese
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: International Braz J Urol (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382013000400558
Resumo: Introduction and Objective Circumcision is one of the oldest surgical procedures and one of the most frequently performed worldwide. It can be done by many different techniques. This prospective series presents the results of Plastibell® circumcision in children older than 2 years of age, evaluating surgical duration, immediate and late complications, time for plastic device separation and factors associated with it. Materials and Methods We prospectively analyzed 119 children submitted to Plastic Device Circumcision with Plastibell® by only one surgeon from December 2009 to June 2011. In all cases the surgery was done under general anesthesia associated with dorsal penile nerve block. Before surgery length of the penis and latero-lateral diameter of the glans were measured. Surgical duration, time of Plastibell® separation and use of analgesic medication in the post-operative period were evaluated. Patients were followed on days 15, 45, 90 and 120 after surgery. Results Age at surgery varied from 2 to 12.5 (5.9 ± 2.9) years old. Mean surgical time was 3.7 ± 2.0 minutes (1.9 to 9 minutes). Time for plastic device separation ranged from 6 to 26 days (mean: 16 ± 4.2 days), being 14.8 days for children younger than 5 years of age and 17.4 days for those older than 5 years of age (p < 0.0001). The diameter of the Plastibell® does not interfered in separations time (p = 0,484). Late complications occurred in 32 (26.8%) subjects, being the great majority of low clinical significance, especially prepucial adherences, edema of the mucosa and discrete hypertrophy of the scar, all resolving with clinical treatment. One patient still using diaper had meatus stenosis and in one case the Plastibell® device stayed between the glans and the prepuce and needed to be removed manually. conclusions Circumcision using a plastic device is a safe, quick and an easy technique with low complications, that when occur are of low clinical importance and of easy resolution. The mean time for the device to fall is shorter in children under 6 years of age and it is not influenced by the diameter of the device.
id SBU-1_914329cc46cf4aa090deb63553865583
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1677-55382013000400558
network_acronym_str SBU-1
network_name_str International Braz J Urol (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older childrenChildProspective StudiesCircumcisionPhimosis Introduction and Objective Circumcision is one of the oldest surgical procedures and one of the most frequently performed worldwide. It can be done by many different techniques. This prospective series presents the results of Plastibell® circumcision in children older than 2 years of age, evaluating surgical duration, immediate and late complications, time for plastic device separation and factors associated with it. Materials and Methods We prospectively analyzed 119 children submitted to Plastic Device Circumcision with Plastibell® by only one surgeon from December 2009 to June 2011. In all cases the surgery was done under general anesthesia associated with dorsal penile nerve block. Before surgery length of the penis and latero-lateral diameter of the glans were measured. Surgical duration, time of Plastibell® separation and use of analgesic medication in the post-operative period were evaluated. Patients were followed on days 15, 45, 90 and 120 after surgery. Results Age at surgery varied from 2 to 12.5 (5.9 ± 2.9) years old. Mean surgical time was 3.7 ± 2.0 minutes (1.9 to 9 minutes). Time for plastic device separation ranged from 6 to 26 days (mean: 16 ± 4.2 days), being 14.8 days for children younger than 5 years of age and 17.4 days for those older than 5 years of age (p < 0.0001). The diameter of the Plastibell® does not interfered in separations time (p = 0,484). Late complications occurred in 32 (26.8%) subjects, being the great majority of low clinical significance, especially prepucial adherences, edema of the mucosa and discrete hypertrophy of the scar, all resolving with clinical treatment. One patient still using diaper had meatus stenosis and in one case the Plastibell® device stayed between the glans and the prepuce and needed to be removed manually. conclusions Circumcision using a plastic device is a safe, quick and an easy technique with low complications, that when occur are of low clinical importance and of easy resolution. The mean time for the device to fall is shorter in children under 6 years of age and it is not influenced by the diameter of the device. Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia2013-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382013000400558International braz j urol v.39 n.4 2013reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)instacron:SBU10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2013.04.14info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessNetto,Jose Murillo BastosAraujo Jr.,Jose Goncalves deNoronha,Marcos Flavio de AlmeidaPassos,Bruno RezendeLopes,Humberto EliasBessa Jr.,Jose deFigueiredo,Andre Avareseeng2013-10-10T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1677-55382013000400558Revistahttp://www.brazjurol.com.br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br1677-61191677-5538opendoar:2013-10-10T00:00International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children
title A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children
spellingShingle A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children
Netto,Jose Murillo Bastos
Child
Prospective Studies
Circumcision
Phimosis
title_short A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children
title_full A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children
title_fullStr A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children
title_full_unstemmed A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children
title_sort A prospective evaluation of plastibell® circumcision in older children
author Netto,Jose Murillo Bastos
author_facet Netto,Jose Murillo Bastos
Araujo Jr.,Jose Goncalves de
Noronha,Marcos Flavio de Almeida
Passos,Bruno Rezende
Lopes,Humberto Elias
Bessa Jr.,Jose de
Figueiredo,Andre Avarese
author_role author
author2 Araujo Jr.,Jose Goncalves de
Noronha,Marcos Flavio de Almeida
Passos,Bruno Rezende
Lopes,Humberto Elias
Bessa Jr.,Jose de
Figueiredo,Andre Avarese
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Netto,Jose Murillo Bastos
Araujo Jr.,Jose Goncalves de
Noronha,Marcos Flavio de Almeida
Passos,Bruno Rezende
Lopes,Humberto Elias
Bessa Jr.,Jose de
Figueiredo,Andre Avarese
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Child
Prospective Studies
Circumcision
Phimosis
topic Child
Prospective Studies
Circumcision
Phimosis
description Introduction and Objective Circumcision is one of the oldest surgical procedures and one of the most frequently performed worldwide. It can be done by many different techniques. This prospective series presents the results of Plastibell® circumcision in children older than 2 years of age, evaluating surgical duration, immediate and late complications, time for plastic device separation and factors associated with it. Materials and Methods We prospectively analyzed 119 children submitted to Plastic Device Circumcision with Plastibell® by only one surgeon from December 2009 to June 2011. In all cases the surgery was done under general anesthesia associated with dorsal penile nerve block. Before surgery length of the penis and latero-lateral diameter of the glans were measured. Surgical duration, time of Plastibell® separation and use of analgesic medication in the post-operative period were evaluated. Patients were followed on days 15, 45, 90 and 120 after surgery. Results Age at surgery varied from 2 to 12.5 (5.9 ± 2.9) years old. Mean surgical time was 3.7 ± 2.0 minutes (1.9 to 9 minutes). Time for plastic device separation ranged from 6 to 26 days (mean: 16 ± 4.2 days), being 14.8 days for children younger than 5 years of age and 17.4 days for those older than 5 years of age (p < 0.0001). The diameter of the Plastibell® does not interfered in separations time (p = 0,484). Late complications occurred in 32 (26.8%) subjects, being the great majority of low clinical significance, especially prepucial adherences, edema of the mucosa and discrete hypertrophy of the scar, all resolving with clinical treatment. One patient still using diaper had meatus stenosis and in one case the Plastibell® device stayed between the glans and the prepuce and needed to be removed manually. conclusions Circumcision using a plastic device is a safe, quick and an easy technique with low complications, that when occur are of low clinical importance and of easy resolution. The mean time for the device to fall is shorter in children under 6 years of age and it is not influenced by the diameter of the device.
publishDate 2013
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2013-08-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382013000400558
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382013000400558
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2013.04.14
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv International braz j urol v.39 n.4 2013
reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
instacron:SBU
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
instacron_str SBU
institution SBU
reponame_str International Braz J Urol (Online)
collection International Braz J Urol (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br
_version_ 1750318073244549120