A Comparison of Three Techniques in Neonatal Circumcision: Artery Forceps, Bone-cutter, and Gomco Clamp Methods
Résumé fourni par la source
Background: Neonatal circumcision is the oldest and most common surgical procedure The safety, ease, and outcomes of various methods of surgical procedures for neonatal circumcision have become increasingly the focus in the reviews of this procedure. This study aimed to identify the easy, safe and acceptable method for neonatal circumcision. Methods: This prospective study involved 357 male neonates, divided into three groups based on the methods used for neonatal circumcision: artery-forceps, bone-cutter, and Gomco methods. Clamps were uniformly applied for 7 minutes (420 seconds). The study assessed procedure time, primary and reactionary bleeding, and outcomes using the adapted Paediatric Penile Perception (PPP) score. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 23, with a p-value set at <0.05. Results: Each group consisted of 119 neonates. The bone-cutter method was the fastest (590.2 ± 60.14 seconds), while the Gomco method was the slowest (624.2 ± 55.16 seconds, p<0.001). Primary bleeding occurred most frequently with the artery-forceps method (37 out of 119), and least with the bone-cutter (p<0.001). Only the artery-forceps group had reactionary bleeding (p=0.018). The bone-cutter and Gomco methods had the highest PPP mean scores: 11.91 ± 0.390 and 11.87 ± 0.566, respectively (p<0.001). Conclusion: The bone-cutter method is the fastest, safest, and produces the best cosmetic outcomes of the three methods studied.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- A Comparison of Three Techniques in Neonatal Circumcision: Artery Forceps, Bone-cutter, and Gomco Clamp Methods
- Date Crossref
- 06/02/2025
- Éditeur
- African Journals Online (AJOL)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.