|An erect penis with a case of phimosis|
|Classification and external resources|
Phimosis is a condition in which the foreskin of the penis cannot be pulled back past the glans. A balloon-like swelling under the foreskin may occur with urination. In teenagers and adults, it may result in pain during an erection, but is otherwise not painful. Those affected are at greater risk of inflammation of the glans, known as balanitis, and other complications.
In young children, it is normal to not be able to pull back the foreskin. In more than 90% of cases, this inability resolves by the age of seven, and in 99% of cases by age 16. Occasionally, phimosis may be caused by an underlying condition such as scarring due to balanitis or balanitis xerotica obliterans. This can typically be diagnosed by seeing scarring of the opening of the foreskin.
Typically, it resolves without treatment by the age of three. Efforts to pull back the foreskin during the early years of a boy's life should not be attempted. For those in whom the condition does not improve further time can be given or a steroid cream may be used to attempt to loosen the tight skin. If this method, combined with stretching exercises, is not effective then other treatments such as circumcision may be recommended. A potential complication of phimosis is paraphimosis, where the tight foreskin becomes trapped behind the glans. The word is from the Greek phimos (φῑμός), meaning "muzzle".
Signs and symptoms
Medical associations advise not to retract the foreskin of an infant, in order to prevent scarring. Some argue that non-retractability may "be considered normal for males up to and including adolescence." Hill states that full retractability of the foreskin may not be achieved until late childhood or early adulthood. A Danish survey found that the mean age of first foreskin retraction is 10.4 years.
Rickwood, as well as other authors, has suggested that true phimosis is over-diagnosed due to failure to distinguish between normal developmental non-retractability and a pathological condition. Some authors use the terms "physiologic" and "pathologic" to distinguish between these types of phimosis; others use the term "non-retractile foreskin" to distinguish this developmental condition from pathologic phimosis.
In some cases a cause may not be clear, or it may be difficult to distinguish physiological phimosis from pathological if an infant appears to be in pain with urination or has obvious ballooning of the foreskin with urination or apparent discomfort. However, ballooning does not indicate urinary obstruction.
- Score 1: full retraction of foreskin, tight behind the glans.
- Score 2: partial exposure of glans, prepuce (not congenital adhesions) limiting factor.
- Score 3: partial retraction, meatus just visible.
- Score 4: slight retraction, but some distance between tip and glans, i.e. neither meatus nor glans can be exposed.
- Score 5: absolutely no retraction of the foreskin.
There are three mechanical conditions that prevent foreskin retraction:
- The inner surface of the foreskin is fused with the glans penis. This is normal in children and adolescents, but abnormal in adults.
Pathological phimosis (as opposed to the natural non-retractability of the foreskin in childhood) is rare and the causes are varied. Some cases may arise from balanitis (inflammation of the glans penis).
Lichen sclerosus et atrophicus (thought to be the same condition as balanitis xerotica obliterans) is regarded as a common (or even the main) cause of pathological phimosis. This is a skin condition of unknown origin that causes a whitish ring of indurated tissue (a cicatrix) to form near the tip of the prepuce. This inelastic tissue prevents retraction.
Phimosis may also arise in untreated diabetics due to the presence of glucose in their urine giving rise to infection in the foreskin.
Phimosis in older children and adults can vary in severity, with some able to retract their foreskin partially (relative phimosis), and some completely unable to retract their foreskin even when the penis is in the flaccid state (full phimosis).
Physiologic phimosis, common in males 10 years of age and younger, is normal, and does not require intervention. Non-retractile foreskin usually becomes retractable during the course of puberty.
If phimosis in older children or adults is not causing acute and severe problems, nonsurgical measures may be effective. Choice of treatment is often determined by whether circumcision is viewed as an option of last resort to be avoided or as the preferred course.
- Topical steroid creams such as betamethasone, mometasone furoate and cortisone are effective in treating phimosis and may provide an alternative to circumcision. It is theorized that the steroids work by reducing the body's inflammatory and immune responses, and also by thinning the skin.
- Stretching of the foreskin can be accomplished manually, with balloons or with other tools. Skin that is under tension expands by growing additional cells.
Surgical methods range from the complete removal of the foreskin to more minor operations to relieve foreskin tightness:
- Circumcision is sometimes performed for phimosis, and is effective.
- Dorsal slit (superincision) is a single incision along the upper length of the foreskin from the tip to the corona, exposing the glans without removing any tissue.
- Ventral slit (subterincision) is an incision along the lower length of the foreskin from the tip of the frenulum to the base of the glans, removing the frenulum in the process. Often used when frenulum breve occurs alongside the phimosis.
- Preputioplasty, in which a limited dorsal slit with transverse closure is made along the constricting band of skin< can be an effective alternative to circumcision. It has the advantage of only limited pain and a short time of healing relative to circumcision, and avoids cosmetic effects.
The most acute complication is paraphimosis. In this condition, the glans is swollen and painful, and the foreskin is immobilized by the swelling in a partially retracted position. The proximal penis is flaccid. Some studies found phimosis to be a risk factor for urinary retention and carcinoma of the penis.
A number of medical reports of phimosis incidence have been published over the years. They vary widely because of the difficulties of distinguishing physiological phimosis (developmental nonretractility) from pathological phimosis, definitional differences, ascertainment problems, and the multiple additional influences on post-neonatal circumcision rates in cultures where most newborn males are circumcised. A commonly cited incidence statistic for pathological phimosis is 1% of uncircumcised males., When phimosis is simply equated with nonretractility of the foreskin after age 3 years, considerably higher incidence rates have been reported. Others have described incidences in adolescents and adults as high as 50%, though it is likely that many cases of physiological phimosis or partial nonretractility were included.
According to some accounts, phimosis prevented Louis XVI of France from impregnating his wife for the first seven years of their marriage. She was 14 and he was 15 when they married in 1770. However, the presence and nature of his genital anomaly is not considered certain, and some scholars (such as Vincent Cronin and Simone Bertiere) assert that surgical repair would have been mentioned in the records of his medical treatments if it had indeed occurred. It should be mentioned that non-retractile prepuce in adolescence is normal, common, and usually resolves with increasing maturity.
US president James Garfield was assassinated by Charles Guiteau in 1881. Guiteau's autopsy report indicated that he had phimosis. At the time, this led to the speculation that Guiteau's murderous behavior was due to phimosis-induced insanity.
- OED 2nd edition, 1989 as /faɪˈməʊsɪs/.
- Entry "phimosis" in Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
- "Phimosis". PubMed Health. Retrieved 28 October 2016.
- "What are the treatment options for phimosis?". PubMed Health. Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care. 7 October 2015. Retrieved 28 October 2016.
- McGregor, TB; Pike, JG; Leonard, MP (March 2007). "Pathologic and physiologic phimosis: approach to the phimotic foreskin.". Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien. 53 (3): 445–8. PMC . PMID 17872680.
- Kirk, Raymond Maurice; Winslet, Marc C. (2007). Essential General Surgical Operations. Elsevier Health Sciences. p. 365. ISBN 0443103143.
- Sukhbir Kaur Shahid (5 March 2012). "Phimosis in Children". ISRN Urol. 2012: 707329. doi:10.5402/2012/707329. PMC . PMID 23002427.
- "Care of the Uncircumcised Penis". Guide for parents. American Academy of Pediatrics. September 2007.
- "Caring for an uncircumcised penis". Information for parents. Canadian Paediatric Society. July 2012.
- Huntley JS, Bourne MC, Munro FD, Wilson-Storey D (September 2003). "Troubles with the foreskin: one hundred consecutive referrals to paediatric surgeons". J R Soc Med. 96 (9): 449–451. doi:10.1258/jrsm.96.9.449. PMC . PMID 12949201.
- Denniston; Hill (October 2010). "Gairdner was wrong". Can Fam Physician. 56 (10): 986–987. PMC . PMID 20944034. Retrieved 2014-04-05.
- George Hill (2003). "Circumcision for phimosis and other medical indications in Western Australian boys". The Medical Journal of Australia. 178 (11): 587; author reply 589–90. PMID 12765511.
- Thorvaldsen MA, Meyhoff H.. Patologisk eller fysiologisk fimose?. Ugeskrift for Læger. 2005;167(16):1852-62. PMID 15929334.
- Rickwood AM, Walker J (1989). "Is phimosis overdiagnosed in boys and are too many circumcisions performed in consequence?". Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 71 (5): 275–7. PMC . PMID 2802472.
Authors review English referral statistics and suggest phimosis is overdiagnosed, especially in boys under 5 years, because of confusion with developmentally nonretractile foreskin.
- Spilsbury K, Semmens JB, Wisniewski ZS, Holman CD (2003). "Circumcision for phimosis and other medical indications in Western Australian boys". Med. J. Aust. 178 (4): 155–8. PMID 12580740.. Recent Australian statistics with good discussion of ascertainment problems arising from surgical statistics.
- Van Howe RS (1998). "Cost-effective treatment of phimosis". Pediatrics. 102 (4): e43–e43. doi:10.1542/peds.102.4.e43. PMID 9755280. A review of estimated costs and complications of 3 phimosis treatments (topical steroids, praeputioplasty, and surgical circumcision). The review concludes that topical steroids should be tried first, and praeputioplasty has advantages over surgical circumcision. This article also provides a good discussion of the difficulty distinguishing pathological from physiological phimosis in young children and alleges inflation of phimosis statistics for purposes of securing insurance coverage for post-neonatal circumcision in the United States.
- McGregor TB, Pike JG, Leonard MP (March 2007). "Pathologic and physiologic phimosis: approach to the phimotic foreskin". Can Fam Physician. 53 (3): 445–8. PMC . PMID 17872680.
- Babu R, Harrison SK, Hutton KA (2004). "Ballooning of the foreskin and physiological phimosis: is there any objective evidence of obstructed voiding?". BJU Int. 94 (3): 384–387. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.04935.x. PMID 15291873.
- Munarriz R, Talakoub L, Kuohung W, et al. (2002). "The prevalence of phimosis of the clitoris in women presenting to the sexual dysfunction clinic: lack of correlation to disorders of desire, arousal and orgasm". J Sex Marital Ther. 28 (Suppl 1): 181–5. doi:10.1080/00926230252851302. PMID 11898701.
- Kikiros, C. S.; Beasley, S. W.; Woodward, A. A. (1993-05-01). "The response of phimosis to local steroid application" (PDF). Pediatric Surgery International. 8 (4): 329–332. doi:10.1007/BF00173357. ISSN 0179-0358.
- Kayaba H, Tamura H, Kitajima S, et al.. Analysis of shape and retractability of the prepuce in 603 Japanese boys. J Urol. 1996;156(5):1813-5.. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65544-7. PMID 8863623.
- Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin: incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys. Arch Dis Child. 1968;43(228):200-3. doi:10.1136/adc.43.228.200. PMID 5689532.
- Edwards S (June 1996). "Balanitis and balanoposthitis: a review". Genitourin Med. 72 (3): 155–9. doi:10.1136/sti.72.3.155. PMC . PMID 8707315.
- Bolla G, Sartore G, Longo L, Rossi C (2005). "[The sclero-atrophic lichen as principal cause of acquired phimosis in pediatric age]". Pediatr Med Chir (in Italian). 27 (3–4): 91–3. PMID 16910457.
- Buechner SA (September 2002). "Common skin disorders of the penis". BJU Int. 90 (5): 498–506. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410X.2002.02962.x. PMID 12175386.
- Cantu Jr. S. Phimosis and paraphimosis at eMedicine
- Bromage, Stephen J.; Anne Crump; Ian Pearce (2008). "Phimosis as a presenting feature of diabetes". BJU International. 101 (3): 338–340. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07274.x. PMID 18005214.
- Hayashi, Y.; Kojima, Y.; Mizuno, K.; Kohri, K. (2011). "Prepuce: phimosis, paraphimosis, and circumcision.". ScientificWorldJournal. 11: 289–301. doi:10.1100/tsw.2011.31. PMID 21298220.
- Øster J (1968). "Further fate of the foreskin. Incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys". Arch. Dis. Child. 43 (228): 200–203. doi:10.1136/adc.43.228.200. PMC . PMID 5689532.
- Zampieri N, Corroppolo M, Giacomello L, et al.. Phimosis: Stretching methods with or without application of topical steroids?. J Pediatr. 2005;147(5):705-6. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2005.07.017. PMID 16291369.
- Moreno, G; Corbalán, J; Peñaloza, B; Pantoja, T (Sep 2, 2014). "Topical corticosteroids for treating phimosis in boys.". The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 9: CD008973. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008973.pub2. PMID 25180668.
- Cuckow PM, Rix G, Mouriquand PD (1994). "Preputial plasty: a good alternative to circumcision". J. Pediatr. Surg. 29 (4): 561–563. doi:10.1016/0022-3468(94)90092-2. PMID 8014816.
- Minagawa T, Murata Y (June 2008). "[A case of urinary retention caused by true phimosis]". Hinyokika Kiyo (in Japanese). 54 (6): 427–9. PMID 18634440.
- Daling JR, Madeleine MM, Johnson LG, et al. (September 2005). "Penile cancer: importance of circumcision, human papillomavirus and smoking in in situ and invasive disease". Int. J. Cancer. 116 (4): 606–616. doi:10.1002/ijc.21009. PMID 15825185.
- Shankar KR, Rickwood AM (1999). "The incidence of phimosis in boys". BJU Int. 84 (1): 101–102. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00147.x. PMID 10444134. This study gives a low incidence of pathological phimosis (0.6% of uncircumcised boys by age 15 years) by asserting that balanitis xerotica obliterans is the only indisputable type of pathological phimosis and anything else should be assumed "physiological". Restrictiveness of definition and circularity of reasoning have been criticized.
- Imamura E (1997). "Phimosis of infants and young children in Japan". Acta Paediatr Jpn. 39 (4): 403–5. doi:10.1111/j.1442-200x.1997.tb03605.x. PMID 9316279. A study of phimosis prevalence in over 4,500 Japanese children reporting that over a third of uncircumcised had a nonretractile foreskin by age 3 years.
- Ohjimi T, Ohjimi H (1981). "Special surgical techniques for relief of phimosis". J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 7 (4): 326–30. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.1981.tb00650.x. PMID 7240535.
- Hodges FM (1999). "The history of phimosis from antiquity to the present". In Milos, Marilyn Fayre; Denniston, George C.; Hodges, Frederick Mansfield. Male and Female Circumcision: Medical, Legal and Ethical Considerations in Pediatric Practice. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. pp. 37–62. ISBN 0-306-46131-5.