Page 9 - Canadian Urological Association guideline on the care of the normal foreskin and neonatal circumcision in Canadian infants (Abridged Version)

dave et al

Table 2. Benefits of circumcision classified by GRADE recommendations
Clinical benefit Direction of Amount of effect Level of evidence GRADE quality of GRADE strength of
evidence evidence recommendation
Decreased risk of UTI Positive 0.07–0.23 Level 2 Low-quality Weak
Decreased risk of HIV Positive 0.34–0.62 Level 1 High-quality Strong*
Decreased risk of HPV prevalence Positive 0.57–0.77 Level 1 Moderate-quality Weak
Decreased risk of HPV incidence Unclear NS Level 2 Low-quality Weak
Decreased risk of HSV Positive 0.36–0.91 Level 2 Moderate-quality Weak
Decreased risk of penile cancer Positive 0.13–0.83 Level 2 Low-quality Weak
*Concerns related to external validity of data for Canadian population. HPV: human papilloma virus; HSV: herpes simplex virus; UTI: urinary tract infection.

analyses for our outcomes, but used the methodology to 12. Winberg J, Andersen HJ, Bergström T, et al. Epidemiology of symptomatic urinary tract infection in child-
hood. Acta Paediatr Scand Suppl 1974:1-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.1974.tb05718.x
objectively classify the quality of evidence we present to 13. Panaretto KS, Craig JC, Knight JF, et al. Risk factors for recurrent urinary tract infection in preschool children.
support our recommendations (Table 2). J Paediatr Child Health 1999;35:454-9. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1754.1999.355417.x
A decision to proceed with neonatal MC requires a thor- 14. Shaikh N, Morone NE, Bost JE, et al. Prevalence of urinary tract infection in childhood: A meta-analysis.
ough discussion on the pros and cons of the procedure. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008; 27:302-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/INF.0b013e31815e4122
This would allow parents contemplating a MC to make a 15. Shaikh N, Morone NE, Lopez J, et al. Does this child have a urinary tract infection? JAMA 2007;298:2895-
2904. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.24.2895
well-informed choice. Given the socioeconomic, educa- 16. Singh-Grewal D, Macdessi J, Craig J. Circumcision for the prevention of urinary tract infection in boys:
tional status, and health demographics of our population, A systematic review of randomized trials and observational studies. Arch Dis Child 2005;90:853-8.
universal neonatal circumcision cannot be justified based https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2004.049353
on the current evidence available. 17. Nayir A. Circumcision for the prevention of significant bacteriuria in boys. Pediatr Nephrol Berl Ger
2001;16:1129-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004670100044
18. Morris BJ, Wiswell TE. Circumcision and lifetime risk of urinary tract infection: A systematic review and
Competing interests: The authors report no competing personal or financial interests. meta-analysis. J Urol 2013;189: 2118-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.114
19. Zorc JJ, Levine DA, Platt SL, et al. Clinical and demographic factors associated with urinary tract infec-
tion in young febrile infants. Pediatrics 2005;116:644-8. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2004-1825
This paper has been peer-reviewed. 20. To T, Agha M, Dick PT, et al. Cohort study on circumcision of newborn boys and subsequent risk of
urinary-tract infection. Lancet Lond Engl 1998;352:1813-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-
6736(98)02392-7
21. Craig JC, Knight JF, Sureshkumar P, et al. Effect of circumcision on incidence of urinary tract infection
References in preschool boys. J Pediatr 1996;128:23-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3476(96)70423-7
22. Morris B, Wiswell T. Circumcision and lifetime risk of urinary tract infection: A systematic review and
1. American Academy of Pediatrics. Male circumcision (August 2012). Available at https://www.aap. meta-analysis. J Urol 2013;189:2118-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.114
org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/newborn-male-circumcision.aspx. Accessed December 23. Alsaywid BS, Saleh H, Deshpande A, et al. High-grade primary vesicoureteral reflux in boys: Long-
19, 2017. term results of a prospective cohort study. J Urol 2010;184:1598-1603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
2. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and juro.2010.04.021
strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:924-6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD 24. Kwak C, Oh S-J, Lee A, et al. Effect of circumcision on urinary tract infection after successful anti-reflux
3. Babu R, Harrison SK, Hutton KAR. Ballooning of the foreskin and physiological phimosis: Is there any surgery. BJU Int 2004;94:627-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.05014.x
objective evidence of obstructed voiding? BJU Int 2004;94:384-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464- 25. Gücük A, Burgu B, Gökçe İ, et al. Do antibiotic prophylaxis and/or circumcision change periurethral uro-
410X.2004.04935.x pathogen colonization and urinary tract infection rates in boys with VUR? J Pediatr Urol 2013;9:1131-6.
4. McGregor TB, Pike JG, Leonard MP. Pathologic and physiologic phimosis: Approach to the phimotic foreskin. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2013.04.014
Can Fam Physician 2007;53:445-8. 26. Mukherjee S, Joshi A, Carroll D, et al. What is the effect of circumcision on risk of urinary tract infection
5. Liu J, Yang J, Chen Y, et al. Is steroids therapy effective in treating phimosis? A meta-analysis. Int Urol in boys with posterior urethral valves? J Pediatr Surg 2009;44:417-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Nephrol 2016;48:335-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-015-1184-9 jpedsurg.2008.10.102
6. Letendre J, Barrieras D, Franc-Guimond J, et al. Topical triamcinolone for persistent phimosis. J Urol 27. Zareba P, Lorenzo AJ, Braga LH. Risk factors for febrile urinary tract infection in infants with
2009;182:1759-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.03.016 prenatal hydronephrosis: Comprehensive, single-centre analysis. J Urol 2014;191: 1614-8.
7. Pileggi F de O, Vicente YAMVA. Phimotic ring topical corticoid cream (0.1% mometasone furoate) treat- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.10.035
ment in children. J Pediatr Surg 2007;42:1749-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2007.05.035 28. Infectious Disease Prevention and Control: Estimates of HIV prevalence and incidence in Canada, 2011.
8. Lund L, Wai KH, Mui LM, et al. An 18-month followup study after randomized treatment Available at https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/migration/phac-aspc/aids-sida/publica-
of phimosis in boys with topical steroid vs. placebo. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2005;39:78-81. tion/epi/2010/pdf/EN_Chapter1_Web.pdf. Accessed December 19, 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00365590410002519 29. Bailey RC, Moses S, Parker CB, et al. Male circumcision for HIV prevention in young men in Kisumu,
9. Nobre YD, Freitas RG, Felizardo MJ, et al. To circ or not to circ: Clinical and pharmacoeconomic out - Kenya: A randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:643-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-
comes of a prospective trial of topical steroid vs. primary circumcision. Int Braz J Urol 2010;36:75-85. 6736(07)60312-2
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-55382010000100012 30. Gray RH, Kigozi G, Serwadda D, et al. Male circumcision for HIV prevention in men in Rakai, Uganda:
10. Yang SSD, Tsai YC, Wu CC, et al. Highly potent and moderately potent topical steroids are effective in treat- A randomized trial. Lancet 2007;369:657-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60313-4
ing phimosis: A prospective randomized study. J Urol 2005;173:1361-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/01. 31. Auvert B, Taljaard D, Lagarde E, et al: Randomized, controlled intervention trial of male circumcision for
ju.0000156556.11235.3f reduction of HIV infection risk: The ANRS 1265 trial. PLoS Med 2005;2:e298. https://doi.org/10.1371/
11. Golubovic Z, Milanovic D, Vukadinovic V, et al. The conservative treatment of phimosis in boys. Br J Urol journal.pmed.0020298
1996;78:786-8. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410X.1996.21724.x

26 CUAJ • February 2018 • Volume 12, Issue 2