Are these side effects of circumcision?

[tammylsmith]

I am having a baby boy in about 1 month, who will remain intact .

Dh and I are still working through his issues, but he is coming around nicely, and though not against circ, is at least questioning it. We haven't talked about the possible complications yet, but Dh's sister's baby (6 months, circed) is going to have to see a urologist for a problem with one of his testicles.

Now I'm not sure if his specific problem is circ related:

There is a flap that is supposed to close off and did not that is allowing fluid to build up in his testicles. His father (also circed) had the same problem .Is this circ related, or just a common problem little boys have, as my SIL has been told?

Then she told me that her Dh's brother, and some of their cousins, all circed, "had problems with small openings" that had to be opened up surgically. Now I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that this problem is often caused by the urethral opening being irritated and inflamed by contact with urine in the diaper. Am I correct that this is, in fact most likely a circ complication? I just thought it would help my dh understand that it is not a risk free procedure with examples beyond just a textbook or website. I don't plan to say anything to SIL about it unless the subject comes up some other way, but for the decision I want dh to make in his own mind, I think it will help.

Thanks for any info!

[glongley]

Fluid in the testicles is called a hydrocele. About 10% of newborns have this, usually resolves on its own in the first year. It has nothing to do with circumcision.

"During normal development, the testicles descend down a tube from the abdomen into the scrotum. Hydroceles result when this tube fails to close. Fluid drains from the abdomen through the open tube. The fluid builds up in the scrotum, where it becomes trapped. This causes the scrotum to become swollen."

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/e...cle/000518.htm

"Problems with small openings" is probably something different. This is probably referring to stricture of the urinary opening (urethra), a condition called meatal stenosis. This is a very common complication of circumcision (7-10% of males), which probably occurs as a result of inflammation of the urinary opening which is exposed to friction and irritation without the protection of the foreskin. It is almost never seen in intact males.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1016016-overview

Gillian

[Fyrestorm]

My DH has had to have 3 surgeries so far for his meatal stenosis. I finally got the urologist to admit that this is a complication of his genitals being cut.

He had always been told that sometimes it just happens.... I finally made him fess up to the fact that he has NEVER seen it in an intact male.

[tammylsmith]

I had a great (though short and sweet, as per my strategy with dh) conversation thanks to the informative responses. Dh even made the connection with a problem he has himself sometimes, when his wet bathing suit or some other such irritant rubs against the urethral opening and causes him urination pain and irritation. I pointed out that this is one of the functions of the foreskin... protection against irritation. He was very thoughtful about it for a bit, and then we moved on to other discussions, but I could tell it sunk in. He had always assumed that the irritation was just normal, and something to deal with. How many men, and mothers, operate under the delusion that these are "normal" problems of the penis, when in fact they are circumcision side effects? So sad that people are just unaware or refuse to educate themselves. I'm glad I found MDC boards, because the information here is incredible!

[tutucrazy]

As gillian said the testicle thing is unrelated...but the meatal stenosis is entirely caused by circumcision. 8-10 in 100 circumcised boys develop meatal stenosis. Meatal stenosis is unseen in intact boys.

[jessjgh1]

And meatal stenosis is (almost) never divulged as a complication of circumcision in the literature out there. It is ridiculous.
Jessica

[tammylsmith]

Interestingly, Web MD clearly lists circumcision trauma and contact with urine in the diaper as a result of circumcision as the main reasons behind this condition. I was happy to be able to show that to dh. You're right though, I think the general public doesn't make the connection.

[jessjgh1]

Complication for circumcision, if you notice, are only immediatly post-operative.... complications of intactness always include lifelong complications.

I've never seen a medical site even mention meatal stenosis when talking about the 'benefits' and risks of circumcision... see AAP, Canadian, etc.

(AAP)
http://www.healthychildren.org/Engli...rcumcised.aspx
http://www.healthychildren.org/Engli...cumcision.aspx

(Canadian Paediatric Society)
http://www.cps.ca/caringforkids/preg...rcumcision.htm


Notice, meatal stenosis is never mentioned. Adhesions are maybe briefly mentioned. It is heartbreaking to read parenting boards where parents post about adhesions and meatal stenosis, corrective surgery, etc. and realize that it was all unnecessary. Even sadder is most never really realize this. They just seem surprised at their 'mis'fortune.

Jessica

[eepster]

Originally Posted by jessjgh1

Complication for circumcision, if you notice, are only immediatly post-operative.... complications of intactness always include lifelong complications.

I've never seen a medical site even mention meatal stenosis when talking about the 'benefits' and risks of circumcision... see AAP, Canadian, etc.

(AAP)
http://www.healthychildren.org/Engli...rcumcised.aspx
http://www.healthychildren.org/Engli...cumcision.aspx

(Canadian Paediatric Society)
http://www.cps.ca/caringforkids/preg...rcumcision.htm


Notice, meatal stenosis is never mentioned. Adhesions are maybe briefly mentioned. It is heartbreaking to read parenting boards where parents post about adhesions and meatal stenosis, corrective surgery, etc. and realize that it was all unnecessary. Even sadder is most never really realize this. They just seem surprised at their 'mis'fortune.

Jessica

They used to mention it on the Canadian site. They revised it pretty recently. It used to be one of my favorite site to give out b/c who can argue with an official site like that. Now it's just OK.

They do still mention it on their for Drs site, but that one is not an easy read.

[jessjgh1]

eepster, I've been using that specific canadian site for about 3-4 years and I don't ever remember it mentioning meatal stenosis.... do you think it was a different website or location of their site or further back than that? That site has been on my list of favorites for a long time-- although it is not perfect it seems to be about the best we can get from a site that should be considered unbiased. So I'm curious that it might have been changed from something that had been stronger- or if there might be another similar 'comparison' to refer people to.
Jessica