This Article
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Warner, E.
Right arrow Articles by Strashin, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Warner, E.
Right arrow Articles by Strashin, E.

Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol 125, Issue 9 967-976, Copyright © 1981 by Canadian Medical Association

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Benefits and risks of circumcision

E. Warner and E. Strashin

Circumcisions are performed either prophylactically in the neonatal period or therapeutically at a later age. About 10% of males not circumcised at birth will eventually require circumcision. The present neonatal circumcision rate is about 80% in the United States and 40% in Canada. The single most important determinant of whether a newborn male will be circumcised is the attitude of the attending physician. The literature was reviewed to determine the proven benefits of circumcision and to compare these with the known risks. Circumcising the newborn facilitates penile hygiene, prevents cancer of the penis and decreases the incidence of genital herpes in later life. Whether it decreases the incidence of cancer of the cervix is still uncertain. More important, neonatal circumcision is associated with much lower morbidity and mortality and with lower costs than therapeutic circumcision. Thus, prophylactic circumcision is recommended for the male population as a whole.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CLIN PEDIATRHome page
R. S. Van Howe
Incidence of Meatal Stenosis following Neonatal Circumcision in a Primary Care Setting
Clinical Pediatrics, January 1, 2006; 45(1): 49 - 54.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JAMAHome page
E. O. Horger III, R. M. Arnett, J. S. Jones, C. Andersson, R. S. Van Howe, C. J. Cold, J. Shechet, S. M. Fried, B. Tanenbaum, J. Lander, et al.
Local Anesthesia for Infants Undergoing Circumcision
JAMA, April 15, 1998; 279(15): 1169 - 1171.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CLIN PEDIATRHome page
P. M. Fleiss, L. M. Robson, A. K.C. Leung, R. S. Van Howe, and G. Weiss
A Perspective on Controversies About Neonatal Circumcision
Clinical Pediatrics, July 1, 1995; 34(7): 395 - 399.
[PDF]

Home page
 CLIN PEDIATRHome page
G. N. Weiss and E. B. Weiss
A Perspective on Controversies Over Neonatal Circumcision
Clinical Pediatrics, December 1, 1994; 33(12): 726 - 730.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
T. G. Ganiats, J. B.C. Humphrey, H. L. Taras, and R. M. Kaplan
Routine Neonatal Circumcision: A Cost-Utility Analysis
Med Decis Making, December 1, 1991; 11(4): 282 - 292.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch DermatolHome page
N. Fakjian, S. Hunter, G. W. Cole, and J. Miller
An Argument for Circumcision: Prevention of Balanitis in the Adult
Arch Dermatol, August 1, 1990; 126(8): 1046 - 1047.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch Pediatr Adolesc MedHome page
H. C. THOMPSON
The Value of Neonatal Circumcision: An Unanswered and Perhaps Unanswerable Question
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, October 1, 1983; 137(10): 939 - 940.
[Abstract] [PDF]

eLetters:

Read all eLetters

Benefits and Risks of Circumcision: A Retrospective
George Hill
CMAJ, 10 Nov 2004 [Full text]