Disposable circumcision suture device: clinical effect and patient satisfaction

Abstract

In our experience patients undergoing circumcision are mostly concerned about pain and penile appearances. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to assess the benefits of a new disposable circumcision suture device (DCSD). A total of 942 patients were equally divided into three groups (conventional circumcision, Shang ring and disposable suture device group). Patients in the DCSD group were anesthetized with compound 5% lidocaine cream, the others with a 2% lidocaine penile block. Operation time, intra-operative blood loss, incision healing time, intra-operative and post-operative pain, the penile appearance and overall satisfaction degree were measured. Operation time and intra-operative blood loss were significantly lower in the Shang ring and suture device groups compared to the conventional group (P < 0.001). Intra-operative pain was less in the suture device group compared with the other two groups (P < 0.001); whereas post-operative pain was higher in the conventional group compared to the other two groups (P < 0.001). Patients in the suture device (80.57%) and Shang ring (73.57%) groups were more satisfied with penile appearances compared with the conventional circumcision group (20.06%, P < 0.05). Patients in suture device group also healed markedly faster than the conventional group (P < 0.01). The overall satisfaction rate was better in the suture device group (78.66%) compared with the conventional (47.13%) and Shang ring (50.00%) groups (P < 0.05). The combination of DCSD and lidocaine cream resulted in shorter operation and incision healing times, reduced intra-operative and post-operative pain and improved patient satisfaction with the cosmetic appearances.

Novel penile circumcision suturing devices versus the shang ring for adult male circumcision: a prospective study

“…The median operation time in the SR group was 6.7±1.3 in our study, and this time is similar to previously described results ( 10 , 13 , 17 , 18 ). The median operation time in the PCSD group was 8.9±5.8min, which is similar to with 7.6±4.5min reported in the study by Lv, et al, ( 13 ). In this paper, the duration of the operation equaled the sum of duration of the anesthesia of the dorsal penile nerve and the operating time.…”

“…Finally, the adjustment-knob was turned counterclockwise 5-8 turns to open the glans receiver socket with main body while maintaining a distance of approximately 5-6mm to determine whether foreskin adhesion was present between the glans receiver socket and main body, Pressing the foreskin with a finger cause the foreskin to fall out naturally. Because the PCSD was equivalent to a circular cutter with stapled anastomosis for circumcision (CCSAC) and a disposable circumcision suture device (DCSD), detailed descriptions of the surgical technique and figures explaining surgical procedures can be found in the studies of Yuan et al, ( 12 ), study and Lv et al, ( 13 ). For the patients with phimosis (types II, III, and IV), the dorsum was cut, and the veutro side of the penis was cut simultaneously so that the glans receiver socket could be easily placed between the glans and the inner preputial skin.…”

Use of a disposable circumcision suture device versus conventional circumcision: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Surgery with the DCSD is the newest method of circumcision. Compared with CC, which requires scalpels and operating scissors, circumcision with the DCSD is easy, convenient, and reduces operative complications 20282930313233343536…”

“…Dorsal incision circumcision is the traditional method of circumcision, but has the disadvantages of a longer operation time, stitch removal pain, and easy infection of the wound; furthermore, surgeons who are new to the technique can easily generate adverse events such as irregular or postoperative hematoma 21222324252627. In contrast, use of the DCSD requires suturing or hemostasis, has a shorter operation and wound healing times, yields less intraoperative blood loss, and results in better cosmetic penile appearance than other methods 20282930313233343536…”

Circumcision standards: can we improve further?

“…Lv et al . 1 present a newly designed disposable circumcision device. The device cuts the foreskin and closes the skin edges with staples simultaneously.…”