Brisson Paul A, Patel Haroon I, Feins Neil R
Department of Pediatric Surgery, Boston Medical Center and Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
J Pediatr Surg. 2002 Sep;37(9):1343-6. doi: 10.1053/jpsu.2002.35005.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Circumcision is the most commonly performed surgical procedure in the United States today. Despite the large number of specialists who perform this procedure, only occasionally are the results unsatisfactory. The purpose of this study is to review the indications for circumcision revision, attempt to identify the specialists who are performing unsatisfactory circumcisions, describe the authors' surgical technique for circumcision revision, and review current coding and billing issues related to this procedure.
The authors reviewed the charts of 56 consecutive children who underwent circumcision revision over a 4-year period (1995 to 1999). They also reviewed their current coding and billing practices for this procedure.
Children undergoing revision of circumcision ranged in age from 6 weeks to 11 years with a mean of 26.7 months. Redundant foreskin was the most common indication for circumcision revision. In 38 patients (68%) the authors were able to identify the specialist who performed the procedure. Pediatricians were most commonly identified (n = 26), followed by residents in training (n = 10) family physician (1), and nurse midwife (1). The authors were unable to identify the type of neonatal circumcision originally performed. Their surgical procedure was the conventional sleeve technique without variation in 55 cases. A gomco clamp was utilized in one patient under local anesthesia and resulted in significant difficulty in the performance of the revision. All patients had a satisfactory cosmetic outcome. There was one complication in a child who required a return to the operating room for postoperative bleeding and hematoma. In review of the authors coding practices they found that there was an appropriate diagnosis code available for redundant foreskin but a specific procedure code was lacking before 2002. The authors also found that midwives perform circumcisions throughout the United States.
Considering the number of neonatal circumcisions performed in the United States, revision of circumcision uncommonly is required. The most common indication for circumcision revision is redundant foreskin. Although pediatricians were most commonly implicated in this study as the source of unsatisfactory circumcisions, that finding probably is more a reflection of local practices and referral patterns. Our recommended surgical procedure, the conventional sleeve technique, is familiar to pediatric surgeons, produces a satisfactory cosmetic result, and is easy to teach to residents and fellows. The authors do not recommend the use of a gomco clamp for circumcision revision. The authors do not feel that a circumcision revision should be delayed expecting that the child will grow into the redundant foreskin. Appropriate diagnosis codes have been available, but a new and more specific procedure code has just been introduced in 2002.
背景/目的:包皮环切术是当今美国最常施行的外科手术。尽管有大量专科医生施行该手术,但手术结果不满意的情况仍较为少见。本研究的目的是回顾包皮环切术修复的适应证,试图找出施行不满意包皮环切术的专科医生,描述作者的包皮环切术修复手术技巧,并回顾与该手术相关的现行编码和计费问题。
作者回顾了1995年至1999年4年间连续56例接受包皮环切术修复的儿童病历。他们还回顾了该手术目前的编码和计费做法。
接受包皮环切术修复的儿童年龄从6周至11岁不等,平均年龄为26.7个月。包皮过长是包皮环切术修复最常见的适应证。在38例(68%)患者中,作者能够确定施行原手术的专科医生。最常被确定的是儿科医生(n = 26),其次是住院医师(n = 10)、家庭医生(1例)和助产士(1例)。作者无法确定最初施行的新生儿包皮环切术的类型。他们的手术方法在55例中采用传统袖套技术,无变化。1例患者在局部麻醉下使用了Gomco夹,导致修复手术操作困难。所有患者的美容效果均令人满意。1例儿童出现并发症,因术后出血和血肿需要返回手术室。在回顾作者的编码做法时,他们发现对于包皮过长有合适的诊断编码,但在2002年之前缺乏具体的手术编码。作者还发现助产士在美国各地都施行包皮环切术。
考虑到美国施行的新生儿包皮环切术数量,包皮环切术修复很少需要。包皮环切术修复最常见的适应证是包皮过长。尽管在本研究中儿科医生最常被认为是包皮环切术结果不满意的原因,但这一发现可能更多地反映了当地的做法和转诊模式。我们推荐的手术方法,即传统袖套技术,儿科外科医生熟悉,美容效果令人满意,且易于向住院医师和研究员传授。作者不推荐在包皮环切术修复中使用Gomco夹。作者认为不应因期望孩子长大后包皮过长而延迟包皮环切术修复。已有合适的诊断编码,但2002年刚刚引入了一个新的、更具体的手术编码。