PEDIATRICS Vol. 85 No. 1 January 1990, pp. 136-137
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail 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 Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by WISWELL, T. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by WISWELL, T. E.

More on Risks of Circumcision

THOMAS E. WISWELL MD1

1 Neonatology Service, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC 20307-5001

In Reply.—

Dr Williams asks, does this settle the debate regarding the "cause and effect" relationship of the intact prepuce and urinary tract infections?1,2 Perhaps not in and of itself; however, three other investigators3-5 recently confirmed our previous observations regarding this association. The risk for urinary tract infection during infancy appears to be at least 10- to 39-fold higher among uncircumcised boys.

What are the reasons boys are not circumcised? I do not have a proportional breakdown, but the two broad categories are (1) parental choice for their healthy child following informed consent counseling and (2) one of several presupposed "medical" contraindications, including prematurity, neonatal illness (pneumonia, persistent pulmonary hypertension, etc), known family history of "bleeding disorders," and recognized genitourinary malformations (most commonly hypospadias).