Document Detail

A randomized clinical study of circumcision with a ring device versus conventional circumcision.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22999700     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
PURPOSE: We investigated the safety and efficacy of Shang Ring™ male circumcision and conventional sleeve resection circumcision in a randomized study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the same period, 479 cases of Shang Ring circumcision and 354 of sleeve resection circumcision were performed. Complete followup data were evaluated on the 2 groups. Operative time, pain score, blood loss, postoperative complications, wound healing time and treatment costs were compared.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in average age and foreskin status between the 2 groups preoperatively (p >0.05). Compared to the conventional group, there were shorter operative time, less blood loss and a lower intraoperative pain score in the ring group (p <0.05). In addition, ring male circumcision showed a lower complication rate than conventional circumcision (6.89% vs 13.28%, p = 0.002). However, wound healing time in the ring group was longer than in the conventional group (mean ± SD 19.86 ± 5.24 vs 13.42 ± 2.35 days, p <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Shang Ring male circumcision is a safe, efficient procedure with a relatively low complication rate and high patient satisfaction. It may be worthwhile to popularize this method, especially in countries where the general population has low to limited resources.
Cheng Yue; Yan Ze-Jun; Ke-Rong Wu; Xin-Jun Su; Jia-Sheng Hu; Jian-Wei Ma; Chuan-Min Guo; Hai-Wei Fang; Rui Su; Yao Zhang; Qing-Hua Zhang
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial; Retracted Publication     Date:  2012-09-19
Journal Detail:
Title:  The Journal of urology     Volume:  188     ISSN:  1527-3792     ISO Abbreviation:  J. Urol.     Publication Date:  2012 Nov 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-10-12     Completed Date:  2012-12-31     Revised Date:  2013-01-17    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  0376374     Medline TA:  J Urol     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  1849-54     Citation Subset:  AIM; IM    
Copyright Information:
Copyright © 2012 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Departments of Urology, First Hospital, Medical College of Ningbo University, Ningbo, People's Republic of China. Electronic address:
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Circumcision, Male / instrumentation*,  methods*
Equipment Design
Retraction In:
J Urol. 2012 Dec;188(6):2443   [PMID:  23293788 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  How Dry is Dry? A Review of Definitions of Continence in the Contemporary Exstrophy/Epispadias Liter...
Next Document:  The Value of Sonoelastography Scores and the Strain Ratio in Differential Diagnosis of Azoospermia.