Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conservative Management of Foreskin Conditions

  • Chapter
Circumcision and Human Rights

  • 1380 Accesses

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.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Pape S. Meeting demand — circumcision. NHS Magazine, Summer 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Private communication from David Jackson, Chief Executive of Bradford Hospitals NHS Trust, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  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. Griffiths DM, Frank JD. Inappropriate circumcision referrals by GPs. J Royal Soc Med 1992; 85:324–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Williams N, Chell J, Kapila L. Why are children referred for circumcision? (letter). BMJ 1993; 306:28.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Farshi Z, Atkinson KR, Squire R. A study of clinical opinion and practice regarding circumcision. Arch Dis Child 2000; 83:393–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. British Medical Association. The law and ethics of male circumcision: guidance for doctors. London: BMA, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hospital services for children and young people, House of Commons Health Committee, 16 March 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  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. NORM-UK Survey of Health Authorities (unpublished), NORM-UK, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Management of Foreskin Conditions (unpublished), British Association of Paediatric Surgeons, June 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gairdner D. The Fate of the foreskin. Br Med J 1949; 2:1433–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin. Arch Dis Child 1968; 43:200–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Agarwal A, Mohta A, Anand RK. Preputial retraction in children. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg 2005; 10(2):89–91.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Thorvaldsen MA, Meyhoff HH. Patologisk eller fysiologisk fimose? [Pathological or physiological phimosis?]. Ugeskr Laeger 2005; 167(17):1858–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Beaugé MD. The causes of adolescent phimosis. Br J Sex Med 1997; 24(5):26.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ying H, Xiu-hua Z. Balloon dilation treatment for phimosis in boys. Chinese Med J 1991; 104:491–3.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dewan PA, Tieu HC, Chieng BS. Phimosis: is circumcision necessary? J Paediatr Child Health 1996; 32(4):285–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Van Howe RS. Cost-effective treatment of phimosis. Pediatrics 1998; 102:E43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. de Castella H. Prepuceplasty: an alternative to circumcision. Ann Royal Coll Surg Engl 1994; 76(4):257–8.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Cuckow PM, Rix G, Mouriquand PDE. Preputial plasty: a good alternative to circumcision. J Pediatr Surg 1994; 29(4):561–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Cuckow P, Mouriquand P. Saving The Normal Foreskin (Letter). Br Med J. 1993; 306:459–60.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Emmett AJJ. Z Plasty reconstruction for preputial stenosis: a surgical alternative to circumcision. Aust Paediatr J 1992; 18:219–20.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fleet MS, Venyo AKG, Rangecroft L. Dorsal relieving incision for the non-retractile foreskin. J Royal Coll Surg Edinb 1995; 40:243–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Parkash S. Phimosis and its plastic correction. J Ind Med Assoc 1972; 58:389.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Cicia S, Florio G. Postectomy for phimosis: 5 year experience. Chir Ital 2000; 52(6):733–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Whalin N. “Triple incision plasty” a convenient procedure for preputial relief. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1992; 26:107–10.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Holmlund D. Dorsal incision of the prepuce and closure with dexon in patients with phimosis. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1973; 7:97–99.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Gaetini AM. [Preputial plastic surgery creating a two-way sliding rim in the treatment of phimosis]. Minerva Pediatr 1984; 36(18):905–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Lane TM, South LM. Lateral prepuceplasty for phimosis. J Royal Coll Surg Edinb 1999; 44:310–2.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Codega G, Guizzardi D, Di Giuseppe P, Fassi P. [Helicoid plasty in the treatment of phimosis]. Minerva Chir 1983; 38(22):1903–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Rickwood AMK. Medical indications for circumcision. BJU Int 1999; 83(Suppl 1):45–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Rickwood AMK, Hemalatha G, Batcup G, Spitz L. Phimosis in boys. Br J Urol 1980; 52:147–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Shankar KR, Rickwood AMK. The Incidence of phimosis in boys. BJU Int 1999; 84:101–2.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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. Potter B. Balanitis xerotica obliterans manifesting on the stump of amputated penis. Arch Dermatol 1959; 79:473.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Ratz JL. Carbon dioxide laser treatment of balanitis xerotica obliterans. J Am Acad Dermatol 1984; 10:925–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Pasieczny TAH. The treatment of balanitis xerotica obliterans with testosterone propionate ointment. Acta Derm Venerol (stockh) 1977; 57:275–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Clark C, Huntley JS, Munro FD, Wilson-Storey D. Managing the paediatric foreskin. Practitioner 2004; 248(1665):888–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Rosemberg SK. Carbon dioxide laser treatment of external genital lesion. Urology 1985; 26:555–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Pride HB, Miller F, Tyler WA. Penile squamous cell carcinoma arising from balanitis obliterans. J Am Acad Dermatol 1993; 29:469–73.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Herschorn S, Colapinto V. Balanitis xerotica obliterans involving anterior urethra. Urology 1979; 14:592–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Garat JM, Checile G, Algaba F, Santaularia JM. Balanitis xerotica obliterans in children. J Urol 1988; 136:136–7.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Hrebinko RL. Circumferential laser vaporization for severe meatal stenosis secondary to balanitis xerotica obliterans. J Urol 1996; 156:1735–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Das S, Tunuguntla HS. Balanitis xerotica obliterans — a review. World J Urol 2000; 18(6):382–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Stuehmer A. Balanitis xerotica obliterans (post operationem) und ihre beziehungen zur “kraurosis glandis et praeputii penis.” Arch Derm Syph 1928; 156:613–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Poynter JH, Levy J. Balanitis xerotica obliterans: effective treatment with topical and sublesional corticosteroids. Br J Urol 1967; 39:420–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Zungri E, Chechile G, Algaba F, Mallo N. Balanitis xerotica obliterans: surgical treatment. Eur Urol 1988; 14:160–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Bale PM, Lochhead A, Martin HC, Gollow I. Balanitis xerotica obliterans in children. Pediatr Pathol 1987; 7:617–27.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Freeman C, Laymon CW. Balanitis xerotica obliterans. Arch Derm Syph 1941; 44:547–61.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Franks AG. Balanitis xerotica obliterans. J Urol 1946; 56:243.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Potter B. Balanitis xerotica obliterans manifesting on the stump of amputated penis. Arch Dermatol 1959; 79:473.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  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. Ledwig PA, Weigand DA. Late circumcision and lichen sclerosus et atrophicus of the penis. J Am Acad Dermatol 1989; 20(2 Pt1):211–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Neill SM, Tatnall FM, Cox NH. Guidelines for the management of lichen sclerosus. Br J Dermatol 2002; 147:640–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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. Lindhagen T. Topical clobetasol propionate compared with placebo in the treatment of the unretractable foreskin. Eur J Surg 1996; 162:969.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Neuhaus IM, Skidmore RA. Balanitis xerotica obliterans and its differential diagnosis. J Am Board Fam Pract 1999; 12(6):473–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Catterall RD, Oats JK. Treatment of balanitis xerotica obliterans with hydrocortisone injections. Br J Vener Dis 1962; 38:75–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Campus GV, Ena P, Scuderi N. Surgical treatment of balanitis xerotica obliterans. Plast Reconstr Surg 1984; 73(4):652–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Kartamaa M, Reitamo S. Treatment of lichen sclerosus with carbon dioxide laser vaporization. Br J Dermatol 1997; 136:365–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Windahl T, Hellsten S. Carbon dioxide laser treatment of lichen sclerosus et atrophicus. J Urol 1993; 150:868–70.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Meykadeh N, Hengge UR. Topische Immunmodulation in der Dermatologie [Topical immunomodulators in dermatology]. Hautarzt 2003; 54(7):641–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Kohn FM. [Article in German]. MMW Fortschr Med 2002; 144(12):30–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. No author identified. National guideline for the management of balanitis. Sex Transm Infect 1999; 75(Suppl 1):S85–8.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Albertini JG, Holck DE, Farley MF. Zoon's balanitis treated with Erbium: YAG laser ablation. Lasers Surg Med 2002; 30(2):123–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Little B, White M. Treatment options for paraphimosis. Int J Clin Pract 2005; 55(9):591–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Patel H. The problem of routine circumcision. Can Med Assoc J 1966; 95:576–581.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. de la Hunt MN. Paediatric day care surgery: a hidden burden for primary care? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1999; 81:179–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Williams N, Kapila L. Complications of circumcision. Br J Surg 1993; 80:1231–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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. Helm KF, Gibson LE, Muller SA. Lichen sclerosus et atrophicus in children and young adults. Pediatr Dermatol 1991; 8:97.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Researcher and Archiver, NORM-UK, PO Box 71, Stone, Staffordshire, ST15, OSF

    John Dalton

Authors
  1. John Dalton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Washington Seattle, Washington, USA

    George C. Denniston

  2. Berkeley, California, USA

    Frederick Mansfield Hodges

  3. National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers San Anselmo, California, USA

    Marilyn Fayre Fayre Milos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dalton, J. (2009). Conservative Management of Foreskin Conditions. In: Denniston, G.C., Hodges, F.M., Milos, M.F. (eds) Circumcision and Human Rights. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9167-4_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation