Overview
Most circumcisions performed on boys during childhood and adolescence
are unnecessary: they are the result of inadequate knowledge of
anatomy, unawareness of alternatives, poor judgement or misdiagnosis
of foreskin problems. (1-4) In the rare instances where there is
a genuinely pathological condition, circumcision is often prescribed
when kinder, less ruthless, cheaper and non-injurious treatments,
not involving amputation, are just as effective. (5-7)
Appropriate Care of the Foreskin
Most foreskin problems can be avoided with proper care of the
normal (uncut) penis.
During the first few years of life, the inside fold of a male's
foreskin is normally stuck to the glans. (8-10) The separation these
two structures occurs slowly and naturally over time; this process
should never be hurried. Attempts to separate them and pull the
foreskin back prematurely will damage the elasticity of the preputial
sphincter, and cause injury, scarring and infection, sometimes so
severe that circumcision may be needed later.
The foreskin is usually retractable by age eighteen. (10) Even
if the glans and foreskin separate before then, the foreskin may
still not be retractable because the opening of the foreskin may
still be very tight and only flexible enough to allow the passage
of urine. (11, 12) The foreskin is meant to work like this, just
like a valve: letting urine out, but not letting dirt in. That is
why it is so tight.
The first person to retract a child's foreskin should always be
the boy himself. (13) Forcing the foreskin back is usually painful
and can cause problems, such as infection, adhesions, and/or acquired
(genuine) phimosis. (13)
Causes of a Reddened Foreskin
When the tip of the foreskin becomes reddened, it is doing its
job of protecting the glans and urinary meatus. (14) Ammoniacal
dermatitis, commonly known as diaper rash, results when bacteria
in the feces react with urine. (14)
Other causes include:
- too much exposure to soiled diapers
- bubble baths
- highly chlorinated water (swimming pools, hot tubs)
- use of soap on the genitals
- laundry soap or detergent on clothing
- antibiotics (microbial flora can be restored by eating live
culture yogurt)
- concentrated urine from dehydration.
Drinking water, soaking in warm baths, bacterial replacement therapy
(liquid Acidophilus culture ingested and applied to the foreskin
4-6 times a day), and running around with a bare bottom all help
healing. (14)
Criteria for Medically Indicated Surgery
According to the Heath Care Financing Administration (USA - but
similar rules apply in other countries), a medically indicated circumcision
requires a patient complaint, a diagnosis of pathology or physical
abnormality, and conservative treatment for a diagnosed condition
prior to surgery. (15)
Circumcision of infants does not meet the criteria for a medically
necessary surgery because there is no documented pathology, no physical
abnormality, and no complaint on the part of the patient. (16-18)
Routine circumcision is therefore non-therapeutic. The American
Medical Association says: "The term 'non-therapeutic' is synonymous
with elective circumcisions that are still commonly performed on
newborn males in the United States." (19)
Male circumcision is traumatic, (20) destructive, (21) removes
protective and erogenous tissue, (21) and is therefore not in the
best interest of the patient. (22) Male post-neonatal circumcision
is not medically justified except in rare circumstances, and only
after all less invasive alternatives have been attempted. (23)
Common Reasons Wrongly Used to Justify Circumcision after the
Neonatal Period
The following are the most common reasons inappropriately given
to circumcise children after the neonatal period.
Social factors
So that children resemble their peers; or because immigrants adopt
what they consider a "social norm"; or because parents
want their children to conform to the majority or customary practice
of their own particular ethnic or religious sub-culture.
Phimosis
Most physicians in the United States receive little or no education
about the structure, functions, development and care of the normal
intact penis. Consequently, they may diagnose a problem that simply
does not exist. The non-retractable foreskin is normal in childhood,
and it becomes retractable only with increasing maturity (10, 24);
this process usually requires no treatment other than reassuring
parents that their child is perfectly normal and healthy. (2, 23)
The American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines state that the foreskin
may not retract until the age of eighteen. (25) Unless it is causing
discomfort, it is no big deal if the foreskin never becomes fully
retractable: many men have a phimotic condition all their lives
and are perfectly happy with it. Even if it is occasionally a nuisance,
they obviously prefer that to the radical alternative - having no
foreskin.
Although the English paediatrician Douglas Gairdner debunked the
myth of infantile phimosis in 1949, (9) he gave inaccurate information
about the age by which foreskin retraction should be possible, asserting
that it should be retractable by three years or five at the latest.
This is too hasty. Wright (1994) calls Gairdner's figures inaccurate
(13), yet many practicing physicians learned this "fact"
at medical school. Consequently, many physicians do not properly
understand the normal development of the penis.
Øster (1968) (10) and Kayaba (1996) (24) provide accurate
data. According to Øster, 23% of boys in the 6-7-year-old-age
group have fully retractable foreskins. By age 10-11, retractibility
increases to 44%; in the 14-15-year-old group, 75% are retractable,
and in the 16-17-year-old group, 95% are retractable. Kayaba's figures
are similar. Kayaba found that 16.7% of 3-4-year-old boys had fully
retractable foreskins. For the 11-15-age group, this figure increased
to 62.9%.
Balanitis Xerotica Obliterans (BXO)
Phimosis caused by balanitis xerotica obliterans (BXO) is recognizable
by a whitish ring of indurated (hardened) tissue near the tip of
the foreskin and this constriction prevents foreskin retraction.
(26, 27) Diagnosis of BXO, an uncommon condition affecting 0.6%
to 1% of boys by their fifteenth birthday, is confirmed by biopsy.
BXO is normally treatable without surgery. (28)
Non-surgical Standard of Treatment of Foreskin Pathologies
Adult phimosis
If a non-retractile foreskin (not BXO-related) causes problems,
such as pain with erections or tearing, retraction can be achieved
by gentle stretching techniques (29) and/or treatment with a topical
steroid ointment (betamethasone valerate 0.05% or clobetasol proprionate
0.05%) for 30 to 60 days. (5-7)
Those rare cases that are unresponsive to stretching techniques
and/or medical treatment may be treated with preputioplasty, a conservative
minimal surgery. This takes the form of a limited dorsal slit with
transverse closure, (30-32) or lateral slits with transverse closure.
(33) Trauma, pain, and morbidity are much lower than with traditional
circumcision. (30-33)
Recurrent balanitis
Physical trauma, irritants, excessive washing, soap, or infection
are the usual causes of balanitis (inflammation of the glans), which
may be protozoal, fungal, viral, bacterial, or amoebic in nature.
The causative factor may be difficult to diagnose. Escala and Rickwood
recommend taking a swab; (34) Birley and Edwards recommend biopsy.
(34)
Appropriate treatment cannot be decided until correct diagnosis
of the causative factor has been determined. (34-36) If balanitis
is caused by trauma such as "foreskin fiddling" or premature
forcible retraction, the traumatic actions need to cease. (34) If
recurrent washing and/or the use of soap or other irritants cause
balanitis, the washing should be stopped and the irritant avoided.
(36) If balanitis is caused by infection, the appropriate antibiotic
should be selected for the specific organism. (35) The proper treatment
is medical, not surgical. The foreskin should be left intact so
that its protective effect (37) may aid in the treatment.
Escala and Rickwood advise circumcision of boys only "after
recurrent attacks of balanitis which cause appreciable discomfort".
(34) Birley and colleagues hesitate to recommend circumcision except
in cases of plasma cell (Zoon's balanitis) and lichen sclerosis,
but state that it may be helpful if the balanitis is recurrent.
(36) They note, however, that several of their balanitis patients
were circumcised men, demonstrating that circumcision did not prevent
balanitis. (36) Edwards recommends circumcision only when the balanitis
is Zoon's balanitis or the balanitis of Queyrat. (35) Circumcision
may not reduce the incidence of balanitis in boys. Preston states
that "balanitis is uncommon in childhood when the prepuce is
performing its protective function." (17) Van Howe found increased
incidence of balanitis in circumcised boys. (38)
There is little evidence and no proof that circumcision for balanitis
is an efficacious treatment. The proper treatment is accurate diagnosis
of the cause of inflammation by inquiry, culture, or biopsy. Once
the etiology of balanitis is determined, irritants must eliminated
and proper treatment provided.
Yeast infections with diabetes mellitus
Some non-circumcised males with diabetes mellitus have recurrent
yeast infections caused by high sugar content in the urine. Careful
control of blood sugar will reduce infections, as will ingestion
and application of Acidophilus culture (bacterial replacement therapy).
Valid Indications for Post-neonatal Circumcision
The following rare conditions may indicate treatment with circumcision:
Frostbite
If the foreskin is frostbitten to the point of necrosis, partial
or full amputation may be required.
Gangrene
Individuals with diabetes or chronic alcoholism have been known
to have circulatory problems that result in gangrene of the foreskin.
Circumcision is indicated in this rare condition.
Malignancy (cancer)
Should a foreskin malignancy (cancer) develop, circumcision is
indicated. Malignancies are extremely rare.
Conclusion
Good medical practice requires that doctors keep abreast of advances
in the treatment of disease. (23) The decade of the 1990s has seen
appreciable advances in the treatment of disease of the prepuce.
Adherence to outmoded treatment after better treatment becomes available
may create vulnerability to medico-legal complications. (39) The
information provided in this document will help doctors keep abreast
of the changes in treatment modalities for common foreskin problems.
References
1. Rickwood AMK, Walker J. Is phimosis overdiagnosed in boys and
are too many circumcisions performed in consequence? Ann R Coll
Surg Engl 1989;71(5):275-7. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/rickwood2/
2. Griffiths D, Frank JD. Inappropriate circumcision referrals
by GPs. J R Soc Med 1992;85:324-325. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/procedure/griffiths-frank/
3. Gordon A, Collin J. Saving the normal foreskin. BMJ 1993; 306:
1-2. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/gordon/
4. Williams N, Chell J, Kapila L. Why are children referred for
circumcision. BMJ 1993; 306: 28. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/williams/
5. Van Howe RS. Cost-effective treatment of phimosis. Pediatrics
1998; 102(4)/e43. URL: http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/102/4/e43
6. Dewan PA, Tieu HC, and Chieng BS. Phimosis: is circumcision
necessary? J Paediatr Child Health 1996;32:285-289. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/dewan/
7. Berdeu D, Sauze L, Ha-Vinh P. Blum-Boisgard C. Cost-effectiveness
analysis of treatments for phimosis: a comparison of surgical and
medicinal approaches and their economic effect. BJU 2001;87(3):239-244.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/berdeu1/
8. Deibert, GA. The separation of the prepuce in the human penis.
Anat Rec 1933;57:387-399. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/deibert/
9. Gairdner D. The fate of the foreskin. Br Med J 1949; 2:1433-1437.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/gairdner/
10. Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin. Arch Dis Child
1968; 43:200-203. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/oster/
11. Spence J. On Circumcision Lancet 1964;2:902. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/spence1/
12. Catzel P. The normal foreskin in the young child. SA Mediese
Tysskrif [South African Medical Journal] 1982; 62:751 URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/catzel/
13. Wright JE. Further to the "Further Fate of the Foreskin".
Med J Aust 1994; 160: 134-135. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/wright2/
14. Questions about your son's intact penis. San Anselmo: National
Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers, 1997.
URL: http://www.nocirc.org/publish/pam4.html
15. Eileen Wayne, MD. Private Communication.
16. Leitch IOW. Circumcision - a continuing enigma. Aust Paediatr
J 1970;6:59-65. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/leitch1/
17. Preston EN. Whither the foreskin. JAMA 1970; 213(11):1853-1858.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/preston/
18. Grimes DA. Routine circumcision of the newborn: a reappraisal.
Am J Obstet Gynecol 1978; 130(2): 125-129. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/preston/
19. Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association.
Report 10: Neonatal circumcision. Chicago: American Medical Association,
1999.URL: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/2036-2511.html
20. Boyle GJ, Goldman R, Svoboda JS, Fernandez E. Male circumcision:
pain, trauma and psychosexual sequelae. J Health Psychology 2002;7(3):329-43.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/boyle6/
21. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized
mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291-295.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/boyle6/
22. Re "J" (Child's religious upbringing and circumcision)
[1999] 2 FCR 34. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/Re_J/
23. Committee on Medical Ethics. Circumcision of Male Infants:
Guidance for Doctors. London: British Medical Association, 1996.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/bma/
24. Kayaba H, Tamura H, Kitajima S, et al. Analysis of shape and
retractability of the prepuce in 603 Japanese boys. J Urol 1996;156(5):1813-1815.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/kayaba/
25. Care of the Uncircumcised Penis, Elk Grove Village, IL: American
Academy of Pediatrics, 1999. [leaflet]. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/aap1999/
26. Rickwood AMK, Hemalatha V, Batcup G, Spitz L. Phimosis in Boys.
Brit J Urol 1980;52:147-150, URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/rickwood/
27. Rickwood AMK. Medical Indications for circumcision. BJU Int
1999;83 Suppl. 1:45-51.
28. Jorgensen ET, Svensson A. Problems with the penis and prepuce
in children: Lichen sclerosus should be treated with corticosteroids
to reduce need for surgery. BMJ 1996;313:692. URL: http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/313/7058/692
29. Beaugé M. Conservative Treatment of Primary Phimosis
in Adolescents [Traitement Médical du Phimosis Congénital
de L'Adolescent]. Saint-Antoine University, Paris VI, 1990-1991.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/beauge/
30. Cuckow PM, Rix G, Mouriquand PDE. Preputial plasty: a good
alternative to circumcision. J Pediatr Surg 1994;29(4):561-563.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/cuckow/
31. de Castella H. Prepuceplasty: an alternative to circumcision.
Ann R Coll of Surg Engl 1994;76(4):257-8. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/decastella/
32. Saxena AK, Schaarschmidt K, Reich A, Willital GH. Non-retractile
foreskin: a single center 13-year experience. Int Surg 2000;85(2):180-3.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/saxena1/
33. Lane TM, South LM. Lateral preputioplasty for phimosis. J R
Coll Surg Edinb 1999;44(5):310-2. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/south1/
34. Escala JM, Rickwood AMK. Balanitis. Brit J Urol 1989;63:196-197.URL:
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/balanitis/escala1/
35. Edwards S. Balanitis and balanoposthitis: a review. Genitourin
Med 1996;72(3):155-9. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/balanitis/edwards1/
36. Birley HDL, Luzzi GA, Bell R. Clinical features and management
of recurrent balanitis: association with atopy and genital washing.
Genitourin Med 1993;69:400-403. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/balanitis/birley/
37. Fleiss P, Hodges F, Van Howe RS. Immunological functions of
the human prepuce. Sex Trans Inf 1998;74:364-367. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/STD/fleiss3/
38. Van Howe RS. Variability in penile appearance and penile findings:
a prospective study. Brit J Urol 1997;80:776-782. URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/complications/vanhowe/
39. Fisher TL. Outmoded treatment. Can Med Assoc J 1966;95:630.
URL: http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/fisher1/
National Organisation
of Circumcision Information Resource Centres
San Anselmo, California
July 2002
|