Foreskin development in 10 421 Chinese boys aged 0–18 years

Abstract

Background

Few studies on foreskin development and the practice of circumcision have been done in Chinese boys. This study aimed to determine the natural development process of foreskin in children.

Methods

A total of 10 421 boys aged 0 to 18 years were studied. The condition of foreskin was classified into type I (phimosis), type II (partial phimosis), type III (adhesion of prepuce), type IV (normal), and type V (circumcised). Other abnormalities of the genitalia were also determined.

Results

The incidence of a completely retractile foreskin increased from 0% at birth to 42.26% in adolescence; however, the phimosis rate decreased with age from 99.7% to 6.81%. Other abnormalities included web penis, concealed penis, cryptorchidism, hydrocele, micropenis, inguinal hernia, and hypospadias.

Conclusions

Incomplete separation of foreskin is common in children. Since it is a natural phenomenon to approach the adult condition until puberty, circumcision should be performed with cautions in children.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1

    Lerman SE, Liao JC. Neonatal circumcision. Pediatr Clin North Am 2001;48:1539–1557.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Elder JS. Congenital anomalies of the genitalia. In: Walsh PC, Vaughan ED, Retik AB, et al (eds). Campbell’s urology, 7th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1998: 2120–2143.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Rajfer JS. Congenital anomalies of the testis and scrotum. In: Walsh PC, Vaughan ED, Retik AB, et al (eds). Campbell’s urology, 7th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1998: 2172–2192.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Gairdner D. The fate of the foreskin: a study of circumcision. Br Med J 1949;2:1433–1437.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Kayaba H, Tamura H, Kitajima S, Fujiwara Y, Kato T, Kato T. Analysis of shape and retractability of the prepuce in 603 Japanese boys. J Urol 1996;156:1813–1815.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Oster J. Further fate of the foreskin. Incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys. Arch Dis Child 1968;43:200–203.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Concepción JC, Fernández PG, Aránegui AM, Rodríguez MG, Casacó BM. The need of circumcision or prepuce dilation. A study with 1200 boys. Arch Esp Urol 2008;61:699–704.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Anne-Marie Houle. Circumcision for all: the pro side. Can Urol Assoc J 2007;1:398–400.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Macneily AE. Routine circumcision: the opposing view. Can Urol Assoc J 2007;1:395–397.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Hirji H, Charlton R, Sarmah S. Male circumcision: a review of the evidence. JMHG 2005;2:21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Van Howe RS. Human papillomavirus and circumcision: a meta-analysis. J Infect 2007;54:490–496.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Christakis DA, Harvey E, Zerr DM, Feudtner C, Wright JA, Connell FA. A trade-off analysis of routine newborn circumcision. Pediatrics 2000;105:246–249.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Shankar KR, Rickwood AM. The incidence of phimosis in boys. BJU Int 1999;84:101–102.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    State Council AIDS working Committee Office and UN Theme Group on HIV/AIDS in China. A joint assessment of HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment and care in China. http://www.chinaids.org.cn/n1971/n2151/n32590.files/n32591.pdf (accessed February 2009)

  15. 15

    World Health Organization, 2008. Report on the global AIDS epidemic. http://www.unaids.org/en/KnowledgeCentre/HIVData/GlobalReport/2008/2008_Global_report.asp (accessed August 20, 2008).

  16. 16

    McCoombe SG, Short RV. Potential HIV-1 target cells in the human penis. AIDS 2006;20:1491–1495.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Patterson BK, Landay A, Siegel JN, Flener Z, Pessis D, Chaviano A, et al. Susceptibility to human immunodefi ciency virus-1 infection of human foreskin and cervical tissue grown in explant culture. Am J Pathol 2002;161:867–873.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Marozsan AJ, Moore DM, Lobritz MA, Fraundorf E, Abraha A, Reeves JD, et al. Differences in the fi tness of two diverse wild-type human immunodefi ciency virus type 1 isolates are related to the effi ciency of cell binding and entry. J Virol 2005;79:7121–7134.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    John Radcliffe Hospital Cryptorchidism Study Group. Cryptorchidism: a prospective study of 7500 consecutive male births, 1984–8. John Radcliffe Hospital Cryptorchidism Study Group. Arch Dis Child 1992;67:892–899.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Ghirri P, Ciulli C, Vuerich M, Cuttano A, Faraoni M, Guerrini L, et al. Incidence at birth and natural history of cryptorchidism: a study of 10,730 consecutive male infants. J Endocrinol Invest 2002;25:709–715.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Song XF, Wei GH, Liu X, Zhang DY, Chen X, Deng YJ. Effects of diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) on INSL3 mRNA expression by Leydig cells derived from mouse embryos and in newborn mice. J Int Med Res 2008;36:512–521.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Hosie S, Loff S, Witt K, Niessen K, Waag KL. Is there a correlation between organochlorine compounds and undescended testes? Eur J Pediatr Surg 2000;10:304–309.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Damgaard IN, Skakkebaek NE, Toppari J, Virtanen HE, Shen H, Schramm KW, et al. Persistent pesticides in human breast milk and cryptorchidism. Environ Health Perspect 2006;114:1133–1138.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guang-Hui Wei.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yang, C., Liu, X. & Wei, GH. Foreskin development in 10 421 Chinese boys aged 0–18 years. World J Pediatr 5, 312–315 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12519-009-0060-z

Download citation

Key words

  • abnormalities
  • circumcision
  • external genitalia
  • foreskin