Advertisement

Conservative Management of Foreskin Conditions

  • John Dalton

Abstract

Circumcision is seen as a valid, and often necessary, medical treatment even in parts of the world where infant circumcision is rarely performed outside the religious arena. This paper looks at the justifications for circumcision “for medical reasons” in the context of British Medical Association advice that circumcision is unethical and inappropriate where non-invasive treatment is safe and effective. The common clinical indications given for circumcision are reviewed against the evidence for the availability of conservative or non-invasive treatment. This review concludes that the effective treatment preserving the foreskin is available in almost all cases commonly treated by circumcision. The only common condition that may justify circumcision is preputial lichen sclerosus which does not respond to potent topical steroids. New developments suggest that circumcision may perhaps be avoided even in these cases.

Keywords

National Health Service Male Circumcision Mometasone Furoate Lichen Sclerosus Clobetasol Propionate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cathcart P, Nuttall M, van der Meulen J, Emberton M, Kenny SE. Trends in paediatric circumcision and its complications in England between 1997 and 2003. Br J Surg 2006 July; 93(7):885–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pape S. Meeting demand — circumcision. NHS Magazine, Summer 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Private communication from David Jackson, Chief Executive of Bradford Hospitals NHS Trust, 1997.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Johnson AM, Wadsworth J, Wellings K, Field J, Bradshaw S. Sexual attitudes and lifestyles. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific, 1994 (ISBN: 0-632-03343-6).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Griffiths DM, Frank JD. Inappropriate circumcision referrals by GPs. J Royal Soc Med 1992; 85:324–5.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rickwood AMK, Walker J. Is phimosis overdiagnosed and are too many circumcisions performed as a result? Ann Royal Coll Surg Engl 1989; 71:275–7.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Williams N, Chell J, Kapila L. Why are children referred for circumcision? (letter). BMJ 1993; 306:28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Farshi Z, Atkinson KR, Squire R. A study of clinical opinion and practice regarding circumcision. Arch Dis Child 2000; 83:393–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huntley JS, Bourne MC, Munro FD, Wilson-Storey D. Troubles with the foreskin: one hundred consecutive referrals to paediatric surgeons. J Royal Soc Med 2003; 96(9): 449–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    British Medical Association. The law and ethics of male circumcision: guidance for doctors. London: BMA, 2006.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hospital services for children and young people, House of Commons Health Committee, 16 March 1997.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cm 3793. Government response to the reports of the health committee on health services for children and young people, Session 1996–1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    NORM-UK Survey of Health Authorities (unpublished), NORM-UK, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Management of Foreskin Conditions (unpublished), British Association of Paediatric Surgeons, June 2006.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gairdner D. The Fate of the foreskin. Br Med J 1949; 2:1433–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin. Arch Dis Child 1968; 43:200–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Morales Concepcion JC, Cordies Jackson E, Guerra Rodriguez M, Mora Casaco B, Morales Aranegui A, Gonzalez Fernandez P. [Should circumcision be performed in childhood?]. Arch Esp Urol 2002; 55(7):807–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    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; 156:1813–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Agarwal A, Mohta A, Anand RK. Preputial retraction in children. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg 2005; 10(2):89–91.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thorvaldsen MA, Meyhoff HH. Patologisk eller fysiologisk fimose? [Pathological or physiological phimosis?]. Ugeskr Laeger 2005; 167(17):1858–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Beaugé MD. The causes of adolescent phimosis. Br J Sex Med 1997; 24(5):26.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zampieri N, Corroppolo M, Camoglio FS, Giacomello L, Ottolenghi A. Phimosis: stretching methods with or without application of topical steroids? J Pediatr 2005 November; 147(5):705–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ying H, Xiu-hua Z. Balloon dilation treatment for phimosis in boys. Chinese Med J 1991; 104:491–3.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dewan PA, Tieu HC, Chieng BS. Phimosis: is circumcision necessary? J Paediatr Child Health 1996; 32(4):285–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Berdeu D, Sauze L, Ha-Vinh P, Blum-Boisgard C. Cost-effectiveness of treatments for phimosis: a comparison of surgical and medicinal approaches and their economic effect. BJU Int 2001; 87:239–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Van Howe RS. Cost-effective treatment of phimosis. Pediatrics 1998; 102:E43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hoffman S, Metz P, Ebbehoj J. A new operation for phimosis: prepuce saving technique with multiple Y-V plasties. Br J Urol 1984; 56:319–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    de Castella H. Prepuceplasty: an alternative to circumcision. Ann Royal Coll Surg Engl 1994; 76(4):257–8.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cuckow PM, Rix G, Mouriquand PDE. Preputial plasty: a good alternative to circumcision. J Pediatr Surg 1994; 29(4):561–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cuckow P, Mouriquand P. Saving The Normal Foreskin (Letter). Br Med J. 1993; 306:459–60.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Emmett AJJ. Z Plasty reconstruction for preputial stenosis: a surgical alternative to circumcision. Aust Paediatr J 1992; 18:219–20.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fleet MS, Venyo AKG, Rangecroft L. Dorsal relieving incision for the non-retractile foreskin. J Royal Coll Surg Edinb 1995; 40:243–5.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Parkash S. Phimosis and its plastic correction. J Ind Med Assoc 1972; 58:389.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cicia S, Florio G. Postectomy for phimosis: 5 year experience. Chir Ital 2000; 52(6):733–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Whalin N. “Triple incision plasty” a convenient procedure for preputial relief. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1992; 26:107–10.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Holmlund D. Dorsal incision of the prepuce and closure with dexon in patients with phimosis. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1973; 7:97–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gaetini AM. [Preputial plastic surgery creating a two-way sliding rim in the treatment of phimosis]. Minerva Pediatr 1984; 36(18):905–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lane TM, South LM. Lateral prepuceplasty for phimosis. J Royal Coll Surg Edinb 1999; 44:310–2.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Codega G, Guizzardi D, Di Giuseppe P, Fassi P. [Helicoid plasty in the treatment of phimosis]. Minerva Chir 1983; 38(22):1903–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Saxena AK, Schaarschmidt K, Reich A,Willital GH. Non-retractile foreskin: a single center 13-year experience. Int Surg 2000; 85(2):180–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Babu R, Harrison SK, Hutton KA. Ballooning of the foreskin and physiological phimosis: is there any objective evidence of obstructed voiding? BJU Int 2004; 94(3):384–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rickwood AMK. Medical indications for circumcision. BJU Int 1999; 83(Suppl 1):45–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rickwood AMK, Kenny E, Donnell C. Towards evidence based circumcision of English boys: survey of trends in practice. Br Med J 2000; 321:792–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rickwood AMK, Hemalatha G, Batcup G, Spitz L. Phimosis in boys. Br J Urol 1980; 52:147–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shankar KR, Rickwood AMK. The Incidence of phimosis in boys. BJU Int 1999; 84:101–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hinchliffe SA, Ciftci AO, Khine MM, Rickwood AMK, Ashwood J, McGill F, Clapham EM, van Velzen D. Composition of the inflammatory infiltrate in pediatric penile lichen sclerosus et atrophicus (balanitis xerotica obliterans): a prospective, comparative immunophenotyping study. Pediatr Pathol 1994; 14:223–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Laymon CW, Freeman C. Relationship of balanitis xerotica obliterans to lichen sclerosus et atrophicus. Arch Derm Syph 1994; 49:57–9.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Potter B. Balanitis xerotica obliterans manifesting on the stump of amputated penis. Arch Dermatol 1959; 79:473.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ratz JL. Carbon dioxide laser treatment of balanitis xerotica obliterans. J Am Acad Dermatol 1984; 10:925–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pasieczny TAH. The treatment of balanitis xerotica obliterans with testosterone propionate ointment. Acta Derm Venerol (stockh) 1977; 57:275–7.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Clark C, Huntley JS, Munro FD, Wilson-Storey D. Managing the paediatric foreskin. Practitioner 2004; 248(1665):888–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rosemberg SK. Carbon dioxide laser treatment of external genital lesion. Urology 1985; 26:555–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Datta C, Dutta SR, Chaudhuri A. Histopathological and immunological studies in a cohort of balanitis xerotica obliterans. J Ind Med Assoc 1993; 91:146–8.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pride HB, Miller F, Tyler WA. Penile squamous cell carcinoma arising from balanitis obliterans. J Am Acad Dermatol 1993; 29:469–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Herschorn S, Colapinto V. Balanitis xerotica obliterans involving anterior urethra. Urology 1979; 14:592–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Garat JM, Checile G, Algaba F, Santaularia JM. Balanitis xerotica obliterans in children. J Urol 1988; 136:136–7.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hrebinko RL. Circumferential laser vaporization for severe meatal stenosis secondary to balanitis xerotica obliterans. J Urol 1996; 156:1735–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jorgensen ET, Svensson A. Problems with the penis and prepuce in children. Lichen sclerosus should be treated with corticosteroids to reduce need for surgery (letter). Br Med J 1996; 313(7058):692.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Das S, Tunuguntla HS. Balanitis xerotica obliterans — a review. World J Urol 2000; 18(6):382–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Stuehmer A. Balanitis xerotica obliterans (post operationem) und ihre beziehungen zur “kraurosis glandis et praeputii penis.” Arch Derm Syph 1928; 156:613–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Poynter JH, Levy J. Balanitis xerotica obliterans: effective treatment with topical and sublesional corticosteroids. Br J Urol 1967; 39:420–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Zungri E, Chechile G, Algaba F, Mallo N. Balanitis xerotica obliterans: surgical treatment. Eur Urol 1988; 14:160–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Bale PM, Lochhead A, Martin HC, Gollow I. Balanitis xerotica obliterans in children. Pediatr Pathol 1987; 7:617–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Weigand DA. Lichen sclerosus et atrophicus, multiple displastic keratosis and squamous cell carcinoma of the glans penis. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 1980; 6:45–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Freeman C, Laymon CW. Balanitis xerotica obliterans. Arch Derm Syph 1941; 44:547–61.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Franks AG. Balanitis xerotica obliterans. J Urol 1946; 56:243.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Potter B. Balanitis xerotica obliterans manifesting on the stump of amputated penis. Arch Dermatol 1959; 79:473.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Harova G, Özkara SK, Gürbüz Y, Çulha M, Yumbul Z. A case of balanitis xerotica obliterans with koilocytosis. Turk J Dermatopathol 1998; 7(3–4).Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ledwig PA, Weigand DA. Late circumcision and lichen sclerosus et atrophicus of the penis. J Am Acad Dermatol 1989; 20(2 Pt1):211–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Neill SM, Tatnall FM, Cox NH. Guidelines for the management of lichen sclerosus. Br J Dermatol 2002; 147:640–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Ledingham JGG, Warrell DA (Eds). Concise Oxford textbook of medicine. OUP, 2000 (ISBN: 0—19—262870—4). Oxford University Press is located in Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lindhagen T. Topical clobetasol propionate compared with placebo in the treatment of the unretractable foreskin. Eur J Surg 1996; 162:969.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Kiss A, Csontai A, Pirot L, Nyirady P, Merksz M, Kiraly L. The response of balanitis xerotica obliterans to local steroid application compared with placebo in children. J Urol 2001; 165(1):219–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Jorgensen ET, Svensson A. The Treatment of phimosis in boys, with a potent topical steroid (clobetasol propionate 0.05%) Cream. Acta Derm Venerol (stockh) 1993; 73(1):55–6.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Dahlman-Ghozlan K, Hedbald MA, Von Krogh G. Penile lichen sclerosus et atrophicus treated with clobetasol diproprionate 0:05% cream: a retrospective clinical and histopathalogical study. J Am Acad Dermatol 1999; 40(3):451–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Neuhaus IM, Skidmore RA. Balanitis xerotica obliterans and its differential diagnosis. J Am Board Fam Pract 1999; 12(6):473–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Vincent MV, MacKinnon E. The response of clinical balanitis xerotica obliterans to the application of topical steroid-based creams. J Pediatr Surg 2005; 40(4):709–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Catterall RD, Oats JK. Treatment of balanitis xerotica obliterans with hydrocortisone injections. Br J Vener Dis 1962; 38:75–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Campus GV, Ena P, Scuderi N. Surgical treatment of balanitis xerotica obliterans. Plast Reconstr Surg 1984; 73(4):652–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Uemura S, Hutson JM, Woodward AA, Kelly JH, Chow CW. Balanitis xerotica obliterans with urethral stricture after hypospadias repair. Pediatr Surg Int 2000; 16(1–2):144–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Riddell L, Edwards A, Sherrard J. Clinical features of lichen sclerosus in men attending a department of genitourinary medicine. Sex Transm Infect 2000; 76:311–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Kartamaa M, Reitamo S. Treatment of lichen sclerosus with carbon dioxide laser vaporization. Br J Dermatol 1997; 136:365–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Windahl T, Hellsten S. Carbon dioxide laser treatment of lichen sclerosus et atrophicus. J Urol 1993; 150:868–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Shelley W B, Shelley ED, Grunenwald MA, Anders TJ, Ramnath A. Long-term antibiotic therapy for balanitis xerotica obliterans. J Am Acad Dermatol 1999; 40:69–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Assmann T, Becker-Wegerich P, Grewe M, Megahed M, Ruzicka T. Tacrolimus ointment for the treatment of vulvar lichen sclerosus. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003; 48(6):935–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Meykadeh N, Hengge UR. Topische Immunmodulation in der Dermatologie [Topical immunomodulators in dermatology]. Hautarzt 2003; 54(7):641–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Birley HDL, Walker MM, Luzzi GA, Bell R, Taylor-Robinson D, Byrne M, Renton AM. Clinical features and management of recurrent balanitis: association with atopy and genital washing. Genitourin Med 1993; 69:400–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Kohn FM. [Article in German]. MMW Fortschr Med 2002; 144(12):30–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    No author identified. National guideline for the management of balanitis. Sex Transm Infect 1999; 75(Suppl 1):S85–8.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Retamar RA, Kien MC, Chouela EN. Zoon's balanitis: presentation of 15 patients, five treated with a carbon dioxide laser. Int J Dermatol 2003; 42(4):305–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Baldwin HE, Geronemus RG. The treatment of Zoon's balanitis with the carbon dioxide laser. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 1989; 15:491–4. Not held. Shows CO2 laser ablation to be an effective alternative to circumcision for treatment of ZB.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Albertini JG, Holck DE, Farley MF. Zoon's balanitis treated with Erbium: YAG laser ablation. Lasers Surg Med 2002; 30(2):123–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Hernandez-Machin B, Hernando LB, Marrero OB, Hernandez B. Plasma cell balanitis of Zoon treated successfully with topical tacrolimus. Clin Exp Dermatol 2005; 30(5):588–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Santos-Juanes J, Sanchez del Rio J, Galache C, Soto J. Topical tacrolimus: an effective therapy for Zoon balanitis (letter). Arch Dermatol 2004; 140(12):1538–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Little B, White M. Treatment options for paraphimosis. Int J Clin Pract 2005; 55(9):591–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Kwak C, Oh SJ, Lee A, Choi H. Effect of circumcision on urinary tract infection after successful antireflux surgery. BJU Int 2004; 94(4):627–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. BJU Int 1996; 77:291–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Masood S, Patel HR, Himpson RC, Palmer JH, Mufti GR, Sheriff MK. Penile sensitivity and sexual satisfaction after circumcision: are we informing men correctly? Urol Int 2005; 75(1):62–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Coursey JW, Morey AF, McAninch JW, Summerton DJ, Secrest C, White P, Miller K, Pieczonka C, Hochberg D, Armenakas N. Erectile function after anterior urethroplasty. J Urol 2001; 166(6):2273–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Fink KS, Carson CC, DeVellis RF. Adult circumcision outcomes study: effect on erectile function, penile sensitivity, sexual activity and satisfaction. J Urol 2002; 167(5):2113–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Patel H. The problem of routine circumcision. Can Med Assoc J 1966; 95:576–581.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    de la Hunt MN. Paediatric day care surgery: a hidden burden for primary care? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1999; 81:179–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Williams N, Kapila L. Complications of circumcision. Br J Surg 1993; 80:1231–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Bioethics. Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics 1995; 95(2):314–7.Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Helm KF, Gibson LE, Muller SA. Lichen sclerosus et atrophicus in children and young adults. Pediatr Dermatol 1991; 8:97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Dalton
    • 1
  1. 1.Researcher and ArchiverStoneOSF

Personalised recommendations