Revision of circumcision in children: Report of 56 cases

Background/Purpose: Circumcision is the most commonly performed surgical procedure in the United States today. Despite the large number of specialists who perform this procedure, only occasionally are the results unsatisfactory. The purpose of this study is to review the indications for circumcision...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of pediatric surgery 2002-09, Vol.37 (9), p.1343-1346
Hauptverfasser: Brisson, Paul A., Patel, Haroon I., Feins, Neil R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background/Purpose: Circumcision is the most commonly performed surgical procedure in the United States today. Despite the large number of specialists who perform this procedure, only occasionally are the results unsatisfactory. The purpose of this study is to review the indications for circumcision revision, attempt to identify the specialists who are performing unsatisfactory circumcisions, describe the authors' surgical technique for circumcision revision, and review current coding and billing issues related to this procedure. Methods: The authors reviewed the charts of 56 consecutive children who underwent circumcision revision over a 4-year period (1995 to 1999). They also reviewed their current coding and billing practices for this procedure. Results: Children undergoing revision of circumcision ranged in age from 6 weeks to 11 years with a mean of 26.7 months. Redundant foreskin was the most common indication for circumcision revision. In 38 patients (68%) the authors were able to identify the specialist who performed the procedure. Pediatricians were most commonly identified (n = 26), followed by residents in training (n = 10) family physician (1), and nurse midwife (1). The authors were unable to identify the type of neonatal circumcision originally performed. Their surgical procedure was the conventional sleeve technique without variation in 55 cases. A gomco clamp was utilized in one patient under local anesthesia and resulted in significant difficulty in the performance of the revision. All patients had a satisfactory cosmetic outcome. There was one complication in a child who required a return to the operating room for postoperative bleeding and hematoma. In review of the authors coding practices they found that there was an appropriate diagnosis code available for redundant foreskin but a specific procedure code was lacking before 2002. The authors also found that midwives perform circumcisions throughout the United States. Conclusions: Considering the number of neonatal circumcisions performed in the United States, revision of circumcision uncommonly is required. The most common indication for circumcision revision is redundant foreskin. Although pediatricians were most commonly implicated in this study as the source of unsatisfactory circumcisions, that finding probably is more a reflection of local practices and referral patterns. Our recommended surgical procedure, the conventional sleeve technique, is familiar to pediatric surgeons, prod
ISSN:0022-3468
1531-5037
DOI:10.1053/jpsu.2002.35005