Comparing post-operative complications rate, in Dissection and Guillotine Circumcision techniques

Authors

  • Ramy Aly Plastic Surgery Registrar, 35 Newry Park, CH2 2AR

Keywords:

Guillotine Techniques, Circumcision, STD, Male

Abstract

In this study, I did a comparison between 2 recognized techniques for male circumcision, regarding post-operative complications rate, follow up was immediate postoperative, 1 week and 4 months post operatively, this was done in one centre, 200 candidates for the study, 50% had circumcision done using guillotine technique, and the other 50% had circumcision done using dissection techniques, post-operative complications rate shows more bleeding and infection in case of dissection technique, but higher rate of incomplete circumcision in case of guillotine technique.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aaron J Krill, Lane S Palmer and Jeffrey S Palmer (2011) Complications of Circumcision,” The Scientific World Journal, vol. 11, pp. 2458–2468.

Carlos A. Angel http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1015820-clinical 2018

Philip H. Zeplin, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Genital Surgery 2019

Robert Darby, A surgical temptation: The demonization of the foreskin & the rise of circumcision in Great Britain 2017

World Health Organization, Department of Reproductive Health and Research and Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) Male circumcision: global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety and acceptability. (2007)

IJLSCI_Vol. 7 No. 3 (2019): Internationl Journal of Life Sciences

Downloads

Published

2019-09-30

How to Cite

Ramy Aly. (2019). Comparing post-operative complications rate, in Dissection and Guillotine Circumcision techniques. International Journal of Life Sciences, 7(3), 491–494. Retrieved from https://ijlsci.in/ls/index.php/home/article/view/837

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 3 (2019): International Journal of Life Sciences

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2019 Author

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If the material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/