Suppr超能文献

乌干达拉凯地区用于成年男性非手术包皮环切的PrePex装置的安全性与可接受性:一项非随机观察性研究。

The safety and acceptance of the PrePex device for non-surgical adult male circumcision in Rakai, Uganda. A non-randomized observational study.

作者信息

Kigozi Godfrey, Musoke Richard, Watya Stephen, Kighoma Nehemia, Nkale James, Nakafeero Mary, Namuguzi Dan, Serwada David, Nalugoda Fred, Sewankambo Nelson, Wawer Maria Joan, Gray Ronald Henry

机构信息

Rakai Health Sciences Program, Entebbe, Uganda.

Department of Urology, Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2014 Aug 21;9(8):e100008. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100008. eCollection 2014.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and acceptance of the PrePex device for medical male circumcision (MMC) in rural Uganda.

METHODS

In an observational study, HIV-uninfected, uncircumcised men aged 18 and older who requested elective MMC were informed about the PrePex and dorsal slit methods and offered a free choice of their preferred procedure. 100 men received PrePex to assess preliminary safety (aim 1). An additional 329 men, 250 chose PrePex and 79 chose Dorsal slit, were enrolled following approval by the Safety Monitoring Committee (aim 2). Men were followed up at 7 days to assess adverse events (AEs) and to remove the PrePex device. Wound healing was assessed at 4 weeks, with subsequent weekly follow up until completed healing.

RESULTS

The PrePex device was contraindicated in 5.7% of men due to a tight prepuce or phimosis/adhesions. Among 429 enrolled men 350 (82.0%) got the PrePex device and 79 (18.0%) the dorsal slit procedure. 250 of 329 men (76.0%) who were invited to choose between the 2 procedures chose Prepex. There were 9 AEs (2.6%) with the PrePex, of which 5 (1.4%) were severe complications, 4 due to patient self-removal of the device leading to edema and urinary obstruction requiring emergency surgical circumcision, and one due to wound dehiscence following device removal. 71.8% of men reported an unpleasant odor prior to PrePex removal. Cumulative rates of completed wound healing with the PrePex were 56.7% at week 4, 84.8% week 5, 97.6% week 6 and 98.6% week 7, compared to 98.7% at week 4 with dorsal slit (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The PrePex device was well accepted, but healing was slower than with dorsal slit surgery. Severe complications, primarily following PrePex self-removal, required rapid access to emergency surgical facilities. The need to return for removal and delayed healing may increase Program cost and client burden.

摘要

目的

评估PrePex装置用于乌干达农村地区男性医学包皮环切术(MMC)的安全性和可接受性。

方法

在一项观察性研究中,向要求进行择期MMC的18岁及以上未感染HIV、未行包皮环切术的男性介绍了PrePex和背侧切开法,并让他们自由选择自己喜欢的手术方式。100名男性接受PrePex以评估初步安全性(目标1)。在安全监测委员会批准后,又招募了329名男性,其中250人选择PrePex,79人选择背侧切开法(目标2)。在第7天对男性进行随访,以评估不良事件(AE)并取出PrePex装置。在第4周评估伤口愈合情况,随后每周随访直至完全愈合。

结果

由于包皮过紧或包茎/粘连,5.7%的男性禁忌使用PrePex装置。在429名登记的男性中,350人(82.0%)使用了PrePex装置,79人(18.0%)接受了背侧切开手术。在被邀请在两种手术方式之间进行选择的329名男性中,250人(76.0%)选择了PrePex。PrePex组发生9例AE(2.6%),其中5例(1.4%)为严重并发症,4例是由于患者自行取下装置导致水肿和尿路梗阻,需要紧急进行手术包皮环切术,1例是由于取下装置后伤口裂开。71.8%的男性在取下PrePex之前报告有难闻气味。PrePex组伤口完全愈合的累积率在第4周为56.7%,第5周为84.8%,第6周为97.6%,第7周为98.6%,而背侧切开法在第4周时为98.7%(p<0.0001)。

结论

PrePex装置被广泛接受,但愈合速度比背侧切开手术慢。严重并发症主要发生在自行取下PrePex之后,需要迅速获得紧急手术设施。需要返回医院取出装置以及愈合延迟可能会增加项目成本和客户负担。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ca08/4140666/d8365e5912fc/pone.0100008.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验