Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

An Argument for Circumcision: Prevention of Balanitis in the Adult

An Argument for Circumcision: Prevention of Balanitis in the Adult Abstract • A cross-sectional study and a retrospective study were performed to determine the frequency of balanitis in a randomly selected group of dermatology patients. A total of 398 subjects were included in the cross-sectional study, 213 (53.5%) of whom had been circumcised. Balanitis was diagnosed in 2.3% of circumcised men and in 12.5% of uncircumcised men. In patients with diabetes mellitus, balanitis occurred with a prevalence of 34.8% in the uncircumcised population, compared with 0% in the circumcised population. Balanitis did occur with increased frequency in the diabetic population (16%), regardless of circumcision status, compared with the nondiabetic population (5.8%). Of 63 circumcisions performed at our institution between 1987 and 1989, 28.6% were for the treatment of balanitis; 44.4%, for phimosis (which was probably induced by chronic balanitis); 19%, in preparation for placement of penile prostheses; and 8%, for miscellaneous reasons. No complications of circumcision were reported. In this group of patients, balanitis was more frequent in diabetic than in nondiabetic uncircumcised men (50% vs 15.4%). (Arch Dermatol. 1990;126:1046-1047) References 1. American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians. Guidelines for Perinatal Care . Evanston, Ill: American Academy of Pediatrics; 1983:87. 2. Wallertein E. The uniquely American enigma . Urol Clin North Am. 1985;12:123-132. 3. Kaplan GW. Circumcision: an overview . Curr Probl Pediatr. 1977;7:3-33. 4. Herzog LW, Alvarez SR. The frequency of foreskin problems in uncircumcised children . AJDC. 1986;140:254-256. 5. Fergusson DM, Hons BA, Lawton JM, Hons BS, Shannon F. Neonatal circumcision and penile problems . Pediatrics . 1988;81:537-540. 6. Taylor PK, Rodin P. Herpes genitalis and circumcision . Br J Ven Dis. 1975;51:274-277. 7. Wainer E, Strashin E. Benefits and risks of circumcision . Can Med Assoc J. 1981;125:967-976. 8. Schellhammer PF, Grabstaldt H. Tumors of the penis . In: Harrison JH, Giddes RF, Perlmutter AD, Stamey TA, Walsh PC, eds. Campbell's Urology . 4th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1979;2:1177-1188. 9. Tan RE. Observations on the frequency of carcinoma of the penis at Macassar and its environs . J Urol. 1963;89:704-705. 10. Thornton GF. Infection and diabetes: symposium on diabetes . Med Clin North Am. 1971;55:931-936. 11. Murdock MI, Selikowitz SM. Diabetes related need for circumcision . Urology . 1974;4:60-62.Crossref http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Dermatology American Medical Association

An Argument for Circumcision: Prevention of Balanitis in the Adult

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/an-argument-for-circumcision-prevention-of-balanitis-in-the-adult-A45Shf9v4B
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0003-987X
eISSN
1538-3652
DOI
10.1001/archderm.1990.01670320070011
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract • A cross-sectional study and a retrospective study were performed to determine the frequency of balanitis in a randomly selected group of dermatology patients. A total of 398 subjects were included in the cross-sectional study, 213 (53.5%) of whom had been circumcised. Balanitis was diagnosed in 2.3% of circumcised men and in 12.5% of uncircumcised men. In patients with diabetes mellitus, balanitis occurred with a prevalence of 34.8% in the uncircumcised population, compared with 0% in the circumcised population. Balanitis did occur with increased frequency in the diabetic population (16%), regardless of circumcision status, compared with the nondiabetic population (5.8%). Of 63 circumcisions performed at our institution between 1987 and 1989, 28.6% were for the treatment of balanitis; 44.4%, for phimosis (which was probably induced by chronic balanitis); 19%, in preparation for placement of penile prostheses; and 8%, for miscellaneous reasons. No complications of circumcision were reported. In this group of patients, balanitis was more frequent in diabetic than in nondiabetic uncircumcised men (50% vs 15.4%). (Arch Dermatol. 1990;126:1046-1047) References 1. American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians. Guidelines for Perinatal Care . Evanston, Ill: American Academy of Pediatrics; 1983:87. 2. Wallertein E. The uniquely American enigma . Urol Clin North Am. 1985;12:123-132. 3. Kaplan GW. Circumcision: an overview . Curr Probl Pediatr. 1977;7:3-33. 4. Herzog LW, Alvarez SR. The frequency of foreskin problems in uncircumcised children . AJDC. 1986;140:254-256. 5. Fergusson DM, Hons BA, Lawton JM, Hons BS, Shannon F. Neonatal circumcision and penile problems . Pediatrics . 1988;81:537-540. 6. Taylor PK, Rodin P. Herpes genitalis and circumcision . Br J Ven Dis. 1975;51:274-277. 7. Wainer E, Strashin E. Benefits and risks of circumcision . Can Med Assoc J. 1981;125:967-976. 8. Schellhammer PF, Grabstaldt H. Tumors of the penis . In: Harrison JH, Giddes RF, Perlmutter AD, Stamey TA, Walsh PC, eds. Campbell's Urology . 4th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1979;2:1177-1188. 9. Tan RE. Observations on the frequency of carcinoma of the penis at Macassar and its environs . J Urol. 1963;89:704-705. 10. Thornton GF. Infection and diabetes: symposium on diabetes . Med Clin North Am. 1971;55:931-936. 11. Murdock MI, Selikowitz SM. Diabetes related need for circumcision . Urology . 1974;4:60-62.Crossref

Journal

Archives of DermatologyAmerican Medical Association

Published: Aug 1, 1990

References