Open AccessCircumcision with "no-flip Shang Ring" and "Dorsal Slit" methods for adult males: a single-centered, prospective, clinical study
Author(s) -
Junhao Lei,
Liang-Ren Liu,
Qiang Wang,
Wen-Ben Xue,
Ting Song,
Shi-Bing Yan,
Lu Yang,
Ping Han,
Ye Zhu
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
asian journal of andrology/asian journal of andrology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.701
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1745-7262
pISSN - 1008-682X
DOI - 10.4103/1008-682x.157544
Subject(s) - medicine , edema , dorsum , prospective cohort study , adverse effect , surgery , anesthesia , slit , patient satisfaction , urology , anatomy , genetics , biology
This paper was aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and safety of adult male circumcision using the Shang Ring™ (SR) with the no-flip technique compared with Dorsal Slit (DS) surgical method. A single-centered, prospective study was conducted at the West China Hospital, where patients were circumcised using the no-flip SR (n = 408) or the DS (n = 94) procedure. The adverse events (AEs) and satisfaction were recorded for both groups, and ring-removal time and percentage of delayed removals were recorded for the SR group. Finally, complete follow-up data were collected for 76.1% of patients (SR: n = 306; DS: n = 76). The average ring-removal time for the SR group was 17.62 ± 6.30 days. The operation time (P < 0.001), pain scores during the procedure (P < 0.001) and at 24 h postoperatively (P < 0.001), bleeding (P = 0.001), infection (P = 0.034), and satisfaction with penile appearance (P < 0.001) in the SR group were superior to those in the DS group. After two postoperative weeks, the percentage of patients with edema in the SR group (P = 0.029) was higher but no differences were found at 4 weeks (P = 0.185) between the two groups. In conclusions, the no-flip SR method was found to be superior to the DS method for its short operation time (<5 min), involving less pain, bleeding, infection, and resulting in a satisfactory appearance. However, the time for recovery from edema took longer, and patients may wear device for 2-3 weeks after the procedure.