Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Circumcision with the plastibell device a long-term follow-up

  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Indications for operation, immediate postoperative morbidity and complications were recorded in 43 patients circumcised with the Plastibell device. Questionnaires were used in recording late postoperative morbidity and complications during the mean observation period of 29 months, and were followed by a clinical and cosmetic assessment. No serious complications were encountered. Compared to classical dissection techniques, dysuria is a prominent feature using the Plastibell device. The Plastibell method leaves a varying amount of foreskin intact, which could well explain why meatal ulcers/stenosis are not seen when employing this method. In areas with low hygienic standards we cannot recommend the method since the ability of retaining smegma must still be present. Used on medical grounds, the method is preferable, as it leaves some of the foreskin intact and is quick and simple to perform.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Galatius, H., Söndergaard, J. O.: Circumcision with the Plastibell device.Ugeskr. Laeger., 143, 818 (1981).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Holmlund, D.: Circumcision—a surgical intervention with very old tradition (in Swedish).Läkartidningen, 32, 3612 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ladegaard-Pedersen, H.: Aspects of circumcision (in Swedish).Manedsskr Prakt. Laegegern., July, 285 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kariher, D. H., Smith, T. W.: Immediate circumcision of the newborn.Obstet. Gynecol., 7, 50 (1956).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Blencke, B.: Circumcision mit einem Plastikgerät.Z. Kinderchir., 9, 420 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fraser, I. A., Allen, M. J., Bagshaw, P. F., Johnstone, M.: A randomized trial to assess childhood circumcision with the Plastibell device compared to a conventional dissection technique.Br. J. Surg., 68, 593 (1981).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Oster, J.: Further fate of the foreskin.Arch. Dis. Childh., 43, 200 (1968).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Leitch, I. O. W.: Circumcision—a continuing enigma.Aust. Paediatr. J., 6, 59 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Patel, H.: The problem of routine circumcision.Can. Med. Assoc. J., 95, 576 (1966).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Holmlund, D.: Dorsal incision of the prepuce and skin closure with dexon in patients with phimosis.Scand. J. Urol. Nephrol., 7, 97 (1972).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Holstebro Hospital, Holstebro, Denmark

    S. M. Sörensen & M. R. Sörensen

Authors
  1. S. M. Sörensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. R. Sörensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sörensen, S.M., Sörensen, M.R. Circumcision with the plastibell device a long-term follow-up. International Urology and Nephrology 20, 159–166 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02550667

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02550667

Keywords

Search

Navigation