Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Libyan International Medical University Journal 2019; 04(02): 69-73
DOI: 10.4103/LIUJ.LIUJ_24_19
Original Article

Presentation and management of postcircumcision meatal stenosis at Hawari Center, Benghazi, Libya: A clinical review of 86 cases

Muftah Elkhafifi
Hawari Center for Urology and Otolaryngology and Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Benghazi University, Benghazi, Libya
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background: Circumcision is a commonly practiced surgical procedure particularly in Islamic countries. As any other surgical procedure, it is attended by some complications of either early (e.g., bleeding) or late (e.g., meatal stenosis [MS]). Objectives: This study was designed to study the different clinical pictures, age at presentation, and management and outcome of postcircumcision MS. Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective study involving 86 children diagnosed with symptomatic MS and underwent meatotomy during the period from January 2010 to December 2018 at Hawari Center for Urology and Otolaryngology, Benghazi. The medical records of the patients reviewed included age at presentation, different clinical pictures, management, and outcomes. All patients were circumcised during the neonatal or infancy period. Results: Patients' age ranged between 3 and 13 years with a mean age of 5.14 years. More than three-quarters of the patients (84.8%) were between 3 and 8 years of age. Forty-six patients (53.4%) presented with pain (burning) during micturition; 17 patients (19.7%) with thin casting stream; 13 patients (15.11%) with thin dorsally deviated stream; five patients (5.8%) with sudden urge to micturiate; 3 (3.40%) patients with frequency of micturition; and only two patients (2.3%) with prolonged voiding time. All our patients operated by meatotomy as a day case procedure under general anesthesia, and there were no recurrences of MS symptoms in any case during the follow-up period. Conclusion: MS is a frequent late complication of neonatal circumcision; it should be excluded by careful meatal examination in any child who is circumcised particularly at the neonatal or nappy period and presented with abnormal micturition or even lower abdominal pain.

Key-words:

Circumcision - complications - meatal stenosis - neonatal

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.




Publication History

Received: 16 October 2019

Accepted: 03 December 2019

Article published online:
10 June 2022

© 2019. Libyan International Medical University. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Ekenze OS. Complications of neonatal circumcision requiring surgical intervention in a developing country. J Trop Pediatr 2013;59:29-7.
  • 2 Saeedi P, Ahmadnia H, Akhavan Rezayat A. Evaluation of the effect of meatal stenosis on the urinary tract by using ultrasonography. Urol J 2017;14:3071-4.
  • 3 Brian K. Circumscion: Preparation, Procedure and follow-up and Recovery Newsletter; 14 June, 2017.
  • 4 Frisch M, Simonsen J. Cultural background, non-therapeutic circumcision and the risk of meatal stenosis and other urethral stricture disease: Two nationwide register-based cohort studies in Denmark 1977-2013. Surgeon 2018;16:107-18.
  • 5 Jack ES. Congenital anomalies of the genitalia. In: Walsh PC, Retick AB, Vaughan ED, Wein AJ, editors. Campbell-Walsh Urology. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 1998. p. 2120-34.
  • 6 Karami H, Abedinzadeh M, Moslemi MK. Assessment of meatal stenosis in neonates undergoing circumcision using plastibell device with two different techniques. Res Rep Urol 2018;10:113-5.
  • 7 Moses S, Bailey RC, Ronald AR. Male circumcision: Assessment of health benefits and risks. Sex Transm Infect 1998;74:368-73.
  • 8 Frisch M, Earp BD. Circumcision of male infants and children as a public health measure in developed countries: A critical assessment of recent evidence. Glob Public Health 2018;13:626-41.
  • 9 Bazmamoun H, Ghorbanpour M, Mousavi-Bahar SH. Lubrication of circumcision site for prevention of meatal stenosis in children younger than 2 years old. Urol J 2008;5:233-6.
  • 10 Mondal SK, Ali MA, Alam MK, Hasina K, Talukder AR, Yusuf MA, et al. Use of lubricant at meatus and circumcision site in younger children prevent post circumcision meatal stenosis: A randomized control trial. J Shaheed Suhrawardy Med Coll 2013;5:35-8.
  • 11 Salimi A, Besharati M, Rashidi Nia SH, Shahmoradi S, Eftekhari SS. Application of the topical hydrocortisone ointment decreases post-circumcision meatal stenosis in neonate: A cross-sectional study. Int J Pediatr 2017;5:5061-7.
  • 12 Joudi M, Fathi M, Hiradfar M. Incidence of asymptomatic meatal stenosis in children following neonatal circumcision. J Pediatr Urol 2011;7:526-8.
  • 13 Ghods K, Soltany S, Alavy TJ, Ghorbani R, Arab D, Ardestani-Zadeh A, et al. Meatal stenosis following circumcision with plastibell device and conventional dissection surgery; a prospective investigation. J Renal Inj Prev 2018;2:84-8.
  • 14 Weiss HA, Larke N, Halperin D, Schenker I. Complications of Circumscion in male neonates, infants and children: A systemic review. BMC Urol 2010;10:1-13.
  • 15 Subramaniam R, Jacobsen AS. Sutureless circumcision: A prospective randomised controlled study. Pediatr Surg Int 2004;20:783-5.
  • 16 Robson WL, Leung AK. The circumcision question. Postgrad Med 1992;91:237-42, 244.
  • 17 Persad R, Sharma S, McTavish J, Imber C, Mouriquand PD. Clinical presentation and pathophysiology of meatal stenosis following circumcision. Br J Urol 1995;75:91-3.
  • 18 Litvak AS, Morris JA Jr., McRoberts JW. Normal size of the urethral meatus in boys. J Urol 1976;115:736-7.
  • 19 Morris BJ, Moreton S, Krieger JN. Meatal stenosis: Getting the diagnosis right. Res Rep Urol 2018;10:237-9.
  • 20 Mahmoudi H. Evaluation of meatal stenosis following neonatal circumcision. Urol J 2005;2:86-8.
  • 21 Cartwright PC, Snow BW, McNees DC. Urethral meatotomy in the office using topical EMLA cream for anesthesia. J Urol 1996;156:857-8.
  • 22 Upadhyay V, Hammodat HM, Pease PW. Post circumcision meatal stenosis: 12 years' experience. N Z Med J 1998;111:57-8.
  • 23 American Academy of Pediatrics. Urology section. Urethral meatal stenosis in males. Pediatrics 1978;61:778-80.
  • 24 Meatal Stenosis. Medscape Website. Available from: http://emedicine. Medscape.com/article/10160-overview. [Last accessed on 2019 Sep 16].