Sensation and Sexual Arousal in Circumcised and Uncircumcised Men

Abstract

Introduction Research, theory, and popular belief all suggest that penile sensation is greater in the uncircumcised as compared with the circumcised man. However, research involving direct measurement of penile sensation has been undertaken only in sexually functional and dysfunctional groups, and as a correlate of sexual behavior. There are no reports of penile sensation in sexually aroused subjects, and it is not known how arousal affects sensation. In principle, this should be more closely related to actual sexual function. Aim This study therefore compared genital and nongenital sensation as a function of sexual arousal in circumcised and uncircumcised men. Methods Twenty uncircumcised men and an equal number of age-matched circumcised participants underwent genital and nongenital sensory testing at baseline and in response to erotic and control stimulus films. Touch and pain thresholds were assessed on the penile shaft, the glans penis, and the volar surface of the forearm. Sexual arousal was assessed via thermal imaging of the penis. Results In response to the erotic stimulus, both groups evidenced a significant increase in penile temperature, which correlated highly with subjective reports of sexual arousal. Uncircumcised men had significantly lower penile temperature than circumcised men, and evidenced a larger increase in penile temperature with sexual arousal. No differences in genital sensitivity were found between the uncircumcised and circumcised groups. Uncircumcised men were less sensitive to touch on the forearm than circumcised men. A decrease in overall touch sensitivity was observed in both groups with exposure to the erotic film as compared with either baseline or control stimulus film conditions. No significant effect was found for pain sensitivity. Conclusion These results do not support the hypothesized penile sensory differences associated with circumcision. However, group differences in penile temperature and sexual response were found.

Effects of circumcision on male sexual functions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…1 Circumcision is generally considered as a simple, rapid operation with efficacy for protection against HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, as confirmed in numerous, highquality studies. [2][3][4][5][6][7] Circumcision has been reported to adversely affect sexual function; 8 however, the majority of studies, including highquality ones [9][10][11] and ones with data arising from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 12,13 show no difference or improvement in sexual function, sensitivity and satisfaction after circumcision. All of the data were considered by the American Academy of Pediatrics in formulating its 2012 policy, which concluded that there were no adverse effects on these parameters.…”

Why circumcision is a biomedical imperative for the 21stcentury

“…(10,115,116) The more important issue of penile sensation during sexual arousal was addressed in a recent thermal imaging study which found no difference. (117) In fact sensitivity decreased similarly in both groups during arousal! Baseline penile temperature was lower in the uncircumcised men, in whom the monitor was under the prepuce, just below the glans.…”

Male Circumcision

“…131,[134][135][136] There is fair evidence that no significant difference exists between circumcised and uncircumcised men in terms of sexual function, as assessed by using the IELT. 129 Limitations to consider with respect to this issue include the timing of IELT studies after circumcision, because studies of sexual function at 12 weeks postcircumcision by using IELT measures may not accurately reflect sexual function at a later period.…”