# Bell vs. traditional circumcision safer?



## emma1325 (May 23, 2005)

Is there *any* evidence showing that plasibell is somehow safer or even less traumatic?

I've researched the bell vs. traditional, so I know the technicalities of the procedures. I'm just wondering if there is any research into the safety...are there fewer deaths or complications w/ plastibell? (Or any research stating that the risks are the same?)

*disclaimer* I'm NOT considering any method of circumcision, only discussing the above with a pro-circ friend.


----------



## Jane (May 15, 2002)

The bell has more re-do's in my experience - I've known 4 boys that had to have a revision surgery at 9-18 months of age. in addition to that, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone - it stinks, literally. It's worse than the belly button smell as the flesh rots off.

Its main benefit, as proposed in the literature to sell it, is that it's "fool proof" or more fool proof and requires less training to use it properly. That's not the evidence you're looking for, but...it's my 2 cents.

Of course I'm not recommending circ, but if the point is cosmetic, shouldn't it have a cosmetic result? Plasticbell doesn't give that. That's plain old stupid for a cosmetic surgery, IMO.


----------



## eepster (Sep 20, 2006)

From what I've seen, the big difference is that there is less of a risk of cutting off the entire penis than there is with the Mogen clamp. There are some unique risks with the plasti-bell method though, such as retaining the ring, or the ring pinching the urethra closed.


----------



## Yulia_R (Jan 7, 2006)

From what I've heard (please correct me if I am wrong, which I very well might be) that plastibell leaves the most pronounces scars in men.


----------



## emma1325 (May 23, 2005)

Thanks guys...no links for me? I'm really interested in knowing if this has been researched or not. *googling some more*


----------



## brant31 (Jan 11, 2009)

I believe it is the Gomco clamp, which relies on tremendous leveraged pressure to crush the blood vessels and flesh, that leaves the distinctive "wide brown ring" scar that many American men have. The Plastibell was developed in part to have an inexpensive, disposable, non-reusable device as well as leave a fainter scar. The tradeoff is that the bell goes home with the boy as the tissue necrotizes. But since the final result is not known until days later when the bell falls off, it has an unacceptably high re-do coefficient.

The Mogen shield was designed in part to help protect the glans, since only loose skin fits in the narrow groove. But as we've seen, it too is prone to slip-ups.

*The body resists circumcision*. It is a wounding of the first order of the penis and there honestly is no easy, neat way to do it, especially when performed at the most vulnerable point in development (the neonatal period). The ancient circumcision that entailed ablating only the distal foreskin (the acroposthion, or the "spigot" or "snout" that extends beyond the glans) was marginally easier, but still led to instances of hemorrhage if the frenular artery was severed.

New products come on the market all the time, including the Tara KLamp (capital "KL" for Kuala Lumpur), the Accucirc and now the Shang Ring. They all share the same basic cosmetic and bleeding problems.


----------



## PlainandTall (May 21, 2010)

there is a notorious case of necrotizing faschiitis that has HORRIBLE photos online- that case happened after a plastibell circumcision- (warning- hold onto your heart- because this will break it)

google "I think this child has an infected penis" and "plastibell"

Also there was a child in Ontario who died within this decade due to a plastibell which caused him to retain urine and his bladder became distended to 7 times it's size.

http://www.canada.com/topics/bodyand...64f880&k=89599

People are wierd how they think the plastibell is like some sort of magic creampuff device that just poof- no pain - no cutting ta-da... I remember one lady online (a mom who's son was circumcised this way!) who was convinced that the plastibell doen't actually cut anything off- that it just kind of pushed everything back and made it stay back.

So to answer your question- no these methods don't have advantages over the other- I think plastibell has a higher risk of infection which gets traded for a higher risk of bleeding with the other methods. Take your pick.


----------



## Crunchy Frog (Aug 24, 2008)

I've always wondered why the tools traditionally used in ritual circumcisions are not used more widely. From what I can tell, this is the quickest and least invasive method, and it doesn't utilize a clamp, so there is little risk of accidental amputation.

It almost seems like they invented all these new devices to make the procedure as drawn out and tortuous as possible. I wonder if the traditional tools had an increased incidence of bleeding. I've always read though, that the traditional ritual methods have lower incidences of complications and "better" cosmetic results.


----------



## eepster (Sep 20, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Crunchy Frog* 
I've always wondered why the tools traditionally used in ritual circumcisions are not used more widely. From what I can tell, this is the quickest and least invasive method, and it doesn't utilize a clamp, so there is little risk of accidental amputation.

It almost seems like they invented all these new devices to make the procedure as drawn out and tortuous as possible. I wonder if the traditional tools had an increased incidence of bleeding. I've always read though, that the traditional ritual methods have lower incidences of complications and "better" cosmetic results.

I believe the greatest "advantage" to all the devices is that it is really easy to train new Drs to use them.

Comparing the relative risks of each method is making me think of comparing the relative risks of sticking paper clips into electrical sockets vs using a hairdryer in the bathtub vs standing in an open field while holding a long metal pole.


----------



## serendipity22 (Sep 19, 2006)

Just a quibble about words....

Quote:

Bell vs. traditional circumcision safer?
Rather than use words like safer, safety etc. which reinforces the connection in peoples' minds with safety and circumcision, use the word 'dangerous' which is the opposite of 'safe'. (Mind works by association)

Hence either:

Bell vs. traditional circumcision - less dangerous?
or
traditional circumcision v. Bell - more dangerous?

Circumcision ALWAYS causes harm. So we could also say:
Bell vs. traditional circumcision less harmful? or
traditional circumcision v. Bell more harmful?

Ive wondered why no adult uses the Plastibell device. I guess its because no adult would tolerate a week of having a horrid little clamp on his body, cutting off the blood supply till the flesh turns black and dies.

Does anyone anyone know if adults ever use the Plastibell?

(And is black the colour the flesh turns?)


----------



## Oubliette8 (Apr 15, 2009)

Plastibell is not manufactured in adult sizes. There are, however, several similar clamp type circumcision devices that are used in adults. They are not commonly used in developed countries. I believe they are training people to use them in Africa where they are pushing circumcision, because they require somewhat less operator skill and no stitches. I think complication rates are higher from these devices in adults.


----------



## OperaDiva (Jun 11, 2009)

Haven't posted here in a while, but I just wanted to say that DS's urologist said the plastibell actually has a HIGHER risk of complications, it's just easier to do







 Unfortunately that ended up being the case for us, DS almost died the day he got circ'd, he slowly hemmorhaged for a few hours (and I mean SLOWLY, it really didn't look like much at first), until we got him back to the ER and he got a blood transfusion and second surgery. Worst day of my life, bar none.


----------



## Pirogi (Apr 5, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OperaDiva* 
Haven't posted here in a while, but I just wanted to say that DS's urologist said the plastibell actually has a HIGHER risk of complications, it's just easier to do







Unfortunately that ended up being the case for us, DS almost died the day he got circ'd, he slowly hemmorhaged for a few hours (and I mean SLOWLY, it really didn't look like much at first), until we got him back to the ER and he got a blood transfusion and second surgery. Worst day of my life, bar none.


----------



## tennisdude23 (Apr 2, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OperaDiva* 
Haven't posted here in a while, but I just wanted to say that DS's urologist said the plastibell actually has a HIGHER risk of complications, it's just easier to do







Unfortunately that ended up being the case for us, DS almost died the day he got circ'd, he slowly hemmorhaged for a few hours (and I mean SLOWLY, it really didn't look like much at first), until we got him back to the ER and he got a blood transfusion and second surgery. Worst day of my life, bar none.

I am really sorry for you and your son. What a terrible way to get introduced to this issue. I'm happy though you here to share your story.


----------



## an_aurora (Jun 2, 2006)

The very first circ I assisted with was a Plastibell, and it was very botched--she yanked it off as she was tying it. Very nasty. And yes, of course, there is cutting involved.


----------

