You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP62-14 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF TWO DISPOSABLE CIRCUMCISION SUTURE DEVICES FOR CIRCUMCISION IN ADULTS: A PROSPECTIVE COMPARATIVE MULTICENTER STUDY Alessia Celeste Bocchino, Esaú Fernández-Pascual, Carlos Toribio-Vázquez, Celeste Manfredi, Guillermo Urdaneta, Carlos Balmori, Andrea Cocci, Nicola Mondaini, and Juan Ignacio Martínez-Salamanca Alessia Celeste BocchinoAlessia Celeste Bocchino More articles by this author , Esaú Fernández-PascualEsaú Fernández-Pascual More articles by this author , Carlos Toribio-VázquezCarlos Toribio-Vázquez More articles by this author , Celeste ManfrediCeleste Manfredi More articles by this author , Guillermo UrdanetaGuillermo Urdaneta More articles by this author , Carlos BalmoriCarlos Balmori More articles by this author , Andrea CocciAndrea Cocci More articles by this author , Nicola MondainiNicola Mondaini More articles by this author , and Juan Ignacio Martínez-SalamancaJuan Ignacio Martínez-Salamanca More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003320.14AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Disposable circumcision suture devices have been developed to optimize outcomes of circumcision, one of the most common surgical procedures worldwide. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two different disposable circumcision suture devices (DCSDs) and compare their surgical outcomes. METHODS: A prospective comparative multicenter study was performed between November 2019 and October 2021. Patients with congenital or acquired phimosis were included. Patients underwent circumcision using a DCSD (CircCurerTM or the ZSR® device) according to the surgeon preference and device availability. Postoperative follow-up was scheduled at 1 week and 2 months for all patients. RESULTS: A total of 215 patients were enrolled, 120 underwent circumcision using CircCurerTM (Group A) and 95 patients using ZSR® (Group B). No differences were observed in baseline characteristics between the two groups (p>0.05). Mean (SD) operative time was 7.0 (2.5) minutes with no significant difference between the groups (p=0.678). Seven patients (5.8%) in Group A and 2 (2.1%) in Group B required accessory stitches (p=0.156). Four subjects (3.3%) in Group A and 1 (1.1%) in group B presented hematoma (p=0.266). Surgical site infection occurred in 1 (0.8%) in Group A and 2 (2.1%) in Group B (p=0.413). Metal clips fell out spontaneously in 39 patients (32.5%) of Group A and 47 (49.5%) of Group B (p<0.001). Median (IQR) Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for postoperative pain was 2.5 (0-4) in Group A and 2.0 (0-4) in Group B (p=0.284). At 2 months, patients of both groups reported a median (IQR) satisfaction of 9 (8-9) points (p=0.469). CONCLUSIONS: DCSDs appear to allow effective and safe circumcision, with short operative times, uncommon and mild complications, and high patient satisfaction; although there are several devices with some relevant differences on the market. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e867 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Alessia Celeste Bocchino More articles by this author Esaú Fernández-Pascual More articles by this author Carlos Toribio-Vázquez More articles by this author Celeste Manfredi More articles by this author Guillermo Urdaneta More articles by this author Carlos Balmori More articles by this author Andrea Cocci More articles by this author Nicola Mondaini More articles by this author Juan Ignacio Martínez-Salamanca More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...