Examining Penile Sensitivity in Neonatally Circumcised and Intact Men Using Quantitative Sensory Testing
- PMID: 26724395
- DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.080
Examining Penile Sensitivity in Neonatally Circumcised and Intact Men Using Quantitative Sensory Testing
Erratum in
-
Publisher's Erratum.J Urol. 2017 Mar;197(3 Pt 1):824. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.01.068. J Urol. 2017. PMID: 28208573 No abstract available.
Abstract
Purpose: Little is known about the long-term implications of neonatal circumcision on the penile sensitivity of adult men, despite recent public policy endorsing the procedure in the United States. In the current study we assessed penile sensitivity in adult men by comparing peripheral nerve function of the penis across circumcision status.
Materials and methods: A total of 62 men (age 18 to 37 years, mean 24.2, SD 5.1) completed study procedures (30 circumcised, 32 intact). Quantitative sensory testing protocols were used to assess touch and pain thresholds (modified von Frey filaments) and warmth detection and heat pain thresholds (a thermal analyzer) at a control site (forearm) and 3 to 4 penile sites (glans penis, midline shaft, proximal to midline shaft and foreskin, if present).
Results: Penile sensitivity did not differ across circumcision status for any stimulus type or penile site. The foreskin of intact men was more sensitive to tactile stimulation than the other penile sites, but this finding did not extend to any other stimuli (where foreskin sensitivity was comparable to the other sites tested).
Conclusions: Findings suggest that minimal long-term implications for penile sensitivity exist as a result of the surgical excision of the foreskin during neonatal circumcision. Additionally, this study challenges past research suggesting that the foreskin is the most sensitive part of the adult penis. Future research should consider the direct link between penile sensitivity and the perception of pleasure/sensation. Results are relevant to policy makers, parents of male children and the general public.
Keywords: circumcision, male; infant, newborn; penis; sensation; sensory thresholds.
Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Male circumcision: Circumcision does not affect sensitivity.Nat Rev Urol. 2016 Feb;13(2):66. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2016.3. Epub 2016 Jan 20. Nat Rev Urol. 2016. PMID: 26787394 No abstract available.
-
Reply by Authors.J Urol. 2016 Jun;195(6):1853. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.121. Epub 2016 Apr 21. J Urol. 2016. PMID: 27015970 No abstract available.
-
Editorial Comment.J Urol. 2016 Jun;195(6):1853. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.120. Epub 2016 Apr 21. J Urol. 2016. PMID: 27015971 No abstract available.
-
Letter from Frisch Re: Examining Penile Sensitivity in Neonatally Circumcised and Intact Men Using Quantitative Sensory Testing: J. A. Bossio, C. F. Pukall and S. S. Steele J Urol 2016;195:1848-1853.J Urol. 2016 Dec;196(6):1821-1822. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.127. Epub 2016 Sep 14. J Urol. 2016. PMID: 27639152 No abstract available.
-
Letter from Morris and Krieger Re: Examining Penile Sensitivity in Neonatally Circumcised and Intact Men Using Quantitative Sensory Testing: J. A. Bossio, C. F. Pukall and S. S. Steele J Urol 2016;195:1848-1853.J Urol. 2016 Dec;196(6):1824-1825. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.127. Epub 2016 Sep 14. J Urol. 2016. PMID: 28125798 No abstract available.
-
Reply by Authors Regarding Letters Re: Examining Penile Sensitivity in Neonatally Circumcised and Intact Men Using Quantitative Sensory Testing J Urol 2016;195:1848-1853.J Urol. 2016 Dec;196(6):1825-1826. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.093. Epub 2016 Sep 12. J Urol. 2016. PMID: 28129103 No abstract available.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
