Phimosis surgery

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Phimosis Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Classification

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Phimosis from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Diagnosis

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Ultrasound

Other Imaging Findings

Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Medical Therapy

Surgery

Primary Prevention

Secondary Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Case Studies

Case #1

Phimosis surgery On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Phimosis surgery

All Images
X-rays
Echo & Ultrasound
CT Images
MRI

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA on Phimosis surgery

CDC onPhimosis surgery

Phimosis surgery in the news

Blogs on Phimosis surgery

Directions to Hospitals Treating Phimosis

Risk calculators and risk factors for Phimosis surgery

Steven C. Campbell, M.D., Ph.D.

Surgery

Phimosis in infancy is nearly always physiological, and needs to be treated only if it is causing obvious problems such as urinary discomfort or obstruction. In older children and adults phimosis should be distinguished from frenulum breve, which more often requires surgery, though the two conditions can occur together.

If phimosis in older children or adults is not causing acute and severe problems, nonsurgical measures may be effective. Choice of treatment is often determined by whether the patient (or doctor) views circumcision as an option of last resort to be avoided or as the preferred course. Some adults with nonretractile foreskins have no difficulties and see no need for correction.

  • Circumcision is the traditional surgical solution for pathological phimosis, and is effective. Serious complications from circumcision are very rare, but minor complication rates (e.g., having to perform a second procedure or meatotomy to revise the first or to re-open the urethra) have been reported in about 0.2-0.6% in most reported series, though others quote higher rates.
  • Preputioplasty, in which a limited dorsal slit with transverse closure is made along the constricting band of skin[1][2]can be an effective alternative to full circumcision. It has the advantage of only extremely limited pain and a very short time of healing relative to the rather more traumatic circumcision, together with no cosmetic effects.

References

  1. Cuckow, PR, Rix, G, Mouriquand, PDE. Preputial Plasty: A Good Alternative to Circumcision J Pediatr Surg 29(4):561-3, 1994
  2. Saxena AK, Schaarschmidt K, Reich A, Willital GH.Non-retractile foreskin: a single center 13-year experience Int Surg 85(2):180-3, 2000

Template:WikiDoc Sources