Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Comment on: Efficacy and safety of two disposable circumcision suture devices for circumcision in adults: a prospective comparative multicenter study

International Journal of Impotence Research (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

A recent study published in the International Journal of Impotence Research (IJIR) by Bocchino et al. [1] prospectively assessed the effectiveness and safety of two disposable circumcision suture devices for adult circumcision across multiple centers. Their comprehensive analysis sheds light on the evolving landscape of these devices, emphasizing patient safety and outcomes.

Our understanding of the safety of disposable circumcision suture devices (DCSDs) largely stems from a 2021 Cochrane review by Hohlfeld et al. [2]. This review highlighted the non-inferiority of these devices in adult circumcision, particularly noting their shorter surgical duration. Other reviews have also suggested promising outcomes with various commercial brands. However, urologists still exercise discretion in selecting the appropriate surgical approach, considering factors like severe glandular adhesions or tight frenulum.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Bocchino AC, Fernández-Pascual E, Toribio-Vázquez C, Manfredi C, Urdaneta G, Balmori C, et al. Efficacy and safety of two disposable circumcision suture devices for circumcision in adults: a prospective comparative multicenter study. Int J Impot Res. 2024: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00933-3.

  2. Hohlfeld AS, Ebrahim S, Zaki Shaik M, Kredo T. Circumcision devices versus standard surgical techniques in adolescent and adult male circumcisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;3:CD012250.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Al Hussein Alawamlh O, Kim SJ, Li PS, Lee RK. Novel devices for adolescent and adult male circumcision. Eur Urol focus. 2018;4:329.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jin XD, Lu JJ, Liu WH, Zhou J, Yu RK, Yu B, et al. Adult male circumcision with a circular stapler versus conventional circumcision: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2015;48:577.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Mavhu W, Hatzold K, Ncube G, Xaba S, Madidi N, Keatinge J, et al. Safety and acceptability of the PrePex device when used in routine male circumcision service delivery during active surveillance in Zimbabwe. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2016;72:S63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA

    Seyed Sajjad Tabei

  2. Glickman Urological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Abu Dhabi, UAE

    Omer A. Raheem

Authors
  1. Seyed Sajjad Tabei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Omer A. Raheem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed equally to the manuscript. Authors SST and OAR contributed to analyzing data and writing manuscripts and references. Authors SST and OAR contributed and supervised the complete and final version of the manuscript and provided extensive revisions and conclusions.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Omer A. Raheem.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tabei, S.S., Raheem, O.A. Comment on: Efficacy and safety of two disposable circumcision suture devices for circumcision in adults: a prospective comparative multicenter study. Int J Impot Res (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00947-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00947-x

Search

Advanced search

Quick links