Downloads: 4
Comparative Study | Surgery | Volume 15 Issue 6, June 2026 | Pages: 1644 - 1662 | India
Male Circumcision-Conventional Versus Circular Stapler: A Prospective Comparative Study
Abstract: This review examines conventional male circumcision and the circular stapler method with emphasis on operative outcomes, safety, healing, and patient satisfaction. Conventional circumcision remains a widely practiced procedure because of its long clinical history and broad acceptance, yet it is often associated with longer operating time, greater blood loss, postoperative pain, and higher dependence on surgical skill. The circular stapler technique was introduced to simplify the procedure by combining cutting and wound closure in a single step, thereby improving consistency and reducing tissue trauma. Evidence from recent comparative studies shows that the stapler method generally offers shorter operative time, lower blood loss, less postoperative pain, faster recovery, and fewer complications than the conventional technique. Patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcomes are also reported to be better with device based procedures. However, the higher cost of the stapler and the occasional need for removal of residual staples remain important concerns. Overall, the available literature supports the circular stapler as a safe and effective alternative to conventional circumcision, while highlighting the need for further studies to evaluate long term outcomes, cost effectiveness, and wider applicability across different clinical settings.
Keywords: Male circumcision, Circular stapler, Conventional circumcision, Postoperative complications, Patient satisfaction
How to Cite?: Dr. Sanatan Jana, Dr. Nilanjan Patra, Saptarshi Jyoti Roy Choudhury, Dr. A. K. Malhotra, "Male Circumcision-Conventional Versus Circular Stapler: A Prospective Comparative Study", Volume 15 Issue 6, June 2026, International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), Pages: 1644-1662, https://www.ijsr.net/getabstract.php?paperid=SR26623052052, DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21275/SR26623052052