SmartClamp circumcision versus conventional dissection technique in terms of parental anxiety: A prospective clinical study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2131Keywords:
Circumcision, clamp, complications, parental anxietyAbstract
Introduction: We prospectively analyzed parental anxiety and outcomes of the SmartClamp circumcision and the classic surgical dissection technique.
Methods: A total of 250 boys underwent circumcision between 2009 and 2012 at Kars State Hospital and Kafkas University Faculty of Medicine in Turkey. The initial 125 children were circumcised by conventional dissection method and the remaining children were operated on with a SmartClamp device. Children in both groups were compared in terms of bleeding, infection, penile edema, operative time, cosmetic result, length of the inner mucosal layer, and parental anxiety. We used a State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) form to gauge how the circumcision affected parental anxiety. This form was completed by parents on postoperative day 2.
Results: There were no statistically significant differences among the 2 groups in terms of age, bleeding, infection, and cosmetic displeasure (p > 0.05). The STAI scores of the parents from the SmartClamp group were statistically higher than that of the other group (p < 0.001). Penile edema was more common in the SmartClamp group (p = 0.039). However, the mean operative time was statistically shorter (p < 0.001) and the inner mucosal length was significantly longer in the SmartClamp group (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Circumcision with the SmartClamp device was faster. Cosmetic results and complication rates were similar. Unfortunately, this technique seemed to entail the disadvantages of longer mucosal length, penile edema, and higher parental anxiety. Urologists should keep these points in mind when choosing a technique.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:
- Post the Article on any Web site
- Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
- Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
- Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.
The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.
You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.
The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:
- That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
- That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
- That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
- That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.
