PDA

View Full Version : 2008-10-06 ADC - Israel: Ritual Circ Ups UTIs


Joseph
October 9th, 2008, 05:20
Dare a people actually question their most treasured rite?

http://adc.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/adc.2008.144063v1?rss=1

Is ritual circumcision a risk factor for neonatal urinary tract infections?
Dario Prais 1*, Rachel Shoov-Furman 1 and Jacob Amir 1

1 Schneider Children's Medical Center of Israel, Israel

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: prais@post.tau.ac.il.

Accepted 9 September 2008

Abstract

Objective: Although circumcision is commonly believed to protect against urinary tract infection (UTI), it is not unusual in neonates in Israel, where almost all male infants are circumcised. The aim of the study was to evaluate the burden of neonatal UTI in Israel and its relationship to circumcision.

Design: Medical records of neonates (T2 months old) hospitalized with UTI were reviewed and demographic and clinical data were collected. The second part of the study consisting of a telephone survey to assess timing and details concerning the circumcision, included two groups: the study group consisting of parents of male infants, aged 8-30 days, hospitalized with UTI and a control group consisting of healthy neonates.

Results: 162 neonates (108 males, 54 females) were hospitalized with UTI. Mean age at admission was significantly lower in males (27.5 vs 37.7 days, p=0.0002). The incidence of UTI in males peaked at 2-4 weeks of age, i.e. the period immediately following circumcision. In females, the incidence tended to rise with age. Accordingly, male predominance disappeared at 7 weeks and the male-to-female ratio reversed. In the second part of the study, 111 males (T1 month old) were included: 48 post-UTI and 63 as a control group. While evaluating the impact of circumcision technique, we found that UTI occurred in 6 of the 24 infants circumcised by a physician (25%), and in 42 of the 87 infants (48%) circumcised by a religious authority; the calculated odds ratio for contracting UTI was 2.8 (95% CI: 1-9.4).

Conclusions: There was a higher preponderance of UTI among male neonates. Its incidence peaked during the early post-circumcision period, as opposed to the age-related rise in females. UTI seems to occur more frequently after traditional circumcision than after physician performed circumcision. We speculate that changes in the hemostasis technique or shortening the duration of the shaft wrapping might decrease the rate of infection after Jewish ritual circumcision.

admin
October 9th, 2008, 18:10
Dare a people actually question their most treasured rite?I don't know about a whole people, but I have a letter from the Israel Medical Association saying they do not endorse routine circumcision. When I couldn't find a policy statement on their web site, I wrote to them, and months later I got the letter back from their legal office.

-Ron

z726
October 9th, 2008, 21:01
Question it? No, read the last sentence of the abstract. The researchers merely suggest a change in technique and follow-up care.

From what I've heard in the past on the subject of urinary tract infections, they're more common in females (who have shorter urinary tracts). This study apparently finds the opposite to be true among a sample that includes only circumcised boys. Sounds like something they should look into further.

What would be useful in a study on UTIs would be to compare incidence in a culture that circumcises against the incidence in a culture that doesn't. I wouldn't be surprised if it's been done already; anybody know of one?

Regener8
October 11th, 2008, 17:56
yeah, its obvious they just want to use a cleaner way to circumcise....[the act of course of which we know, is 'unclean']

as for research unfortunately no, nothing that specifically limits the discussion to those parameters. Although Ive not yet done a thorough search.

Joseph
October 12th, 2008, 10:47
All I'm saying is that it's a big shock to me that any professional group in ISRAEL of all places would have the guts to even suggest that there might be SOMETHING wrong with ANY aspect of circumcision, ritual or medical.

IMO, I say it's a start.