Microorganisms and Antibiotic Profile of the Subpreputial Space in Uncircumcised Boys
Vol. 17 No. 6 (2020),
9 January 2021
Purpose: This study investigates the frequency of isolated microorganisms and the antimicrobial resistant pattern of inner foreskin and smegma in prepubertal children.
Materials and Methods: This comparative cross-sectional study was conducted between March and November 2019, where 132 prepubertal boys, who were scheduled to receive religious circumcisions at our outpatient clinic, were examined. The patients were divided into the following groups based on the presence of smegma in their subpreputial space: Group I (with smegma, n=58) and Group II (without smegma, n=74). Sterile stuart transport swabs (Advanced Diagnostic Research, Mediko Kimya, Turkey) were taken from the smegma or the subpreputial space (glans surface and inner foreskin) using aseptic techniques and then the swab samples were immediately transported by sterile stuart transportation for microscopy, culture identification, and antibiographic resistance testing by conventional test methods and automated systems (VITEK II, Biomerieux, France) to the Microbiological Laboratory of our hospital.
Results: 48 bacteria isolated from 39 boys in Group I comprised 28 gram-positive species (58.3%) and 20 gram-negative species (41.7%). The most commonly isolated gram-negative bacterium was Proteus mirabilis (45%) while most positive was Staphylococcus hominis (42.9%). In Group II, 68 boys had 103 bacterial isolates in the glans comprising 81 gram-positive species (78.6%) and 22 gram-negative species (21.4%). The most commonly isolated gram-negative bacterium was Proteus mirabilis (42.9%) while the most positive were Enterococcus faecalis (40.7%) and S. hominis (42.9%)
Conclusion: The subpreputial space of uncircumcised boys is colonized by various types of uropathogens resistant to multidrug drugs. Smegma does not pose additional risks to microbiological colonization in children.
How to Cite
Gollaher DL. The Jewish tradition. In: Circumcision: History of the World’s Most Controversial Surgery. New York USA: Basic Books; 2000. p. 1‑30.
Schoen EJ. The status of circumcision of newborns. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:1308-1311.
Poland RL. The question of routine neonatal circumcision. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:1312-1315.
American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Fetus and Newborn. Standards and Recommendations for Hospital Care of Newborn Infants. 5th ed. Evanston, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics; 1971:110.
Thompson HC, King LR, Knox E, Korones SB. Report of the ad hoc task force on circumcision. Pediatrics. 1975;56:610-611.
Ginsburg CM, McCracken GH Jr. Urinary tract infections in young infants. Pediatrics. 1982;69:409-12.
Wiswell TE, Smith FR, Bass JW. Decreased incidence of urinary tract infections in circumcised male infants. Pediatrics. 1985;75:901-3.
Wiswell TE, Hachey WE. Urinary tract infections and the uncircumcised state: an update. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1993;32:130-4.
Wiswell TE. John K. Lattimer Lecture. Prepuce Presence Portends prevalence of Potentially Perilous Periurethral Pathogens. J Urol. 1992;148:739-42.
Glennon J, Ryan PJ, Keane CT, Rees JP. Circumcision and periurethral carriage of Proteus mirabilis in boys. Arch Dis Child. 1988;63:556-7.
Herzog LW. Urinary tract infections and circumcision. A case control study. Am J Dis Child. 1989;143:348-50.
Fussell EN, Kaack MB, Cherry R, Roberts JA. Adherence of bacteria to human foreskins. J Urol. 1988;140:997-1001.
Fleiss PM, Hodges FM, Van Howe RS. Immunological functions of the human prepuce. Sex Transm Infect. 1998;74:364-7.
Van Howe RS, Hodges FM. The carcinogenicity of smegma: debunking a myth. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2006;20:1046-54.
Parkash S, Jeyakumar S, Subramanyan K, Chaudhuri S. Human subpreputial collection: its nature and formation. J Urol. 1973;110:211-2.
Cold CJ, Taylor JR. The prepuce. BJU Int. 1999;83:34-44.
Sonnex C, Croucher PE, Dockerty WG. Balanoposthitis associated with the presence of subpreputial "smegma stones". Genitourin Med. 1997;73:567.
Verit A, Zeyrek FY, Mordeniz C, Ciftci H, Savas M. Status of high-risk oncogenic human papilloma virus subtypes harbored in the prepuce of prepubertal boys. Urology. 2012;80:423-6.
Schoen EJ, Colby CJ, Ray GT. Newborn circumcision decreases incidence and costs of urinary tract infections during the first year of life. Pediatrics. 2000;105:789-93.
Agartan CA, Kaya DA, Ozturk CE, Gulcan A. Is aerobic preputial flora age dependent? Jpn J Infect Dis. 2005;58:276.
Prakash S, Rao R, Venkatesan K, Ramakrishnan S. Sub-preputial wetness-its nature. Ann Natl Med Sci (India). 1982;18:109-12.
Tobgi RS, Samaranayake LP, MacFarlane TW. In vitro susceptibility of Candida species to lysozyme. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1988;3:35-9.
Anyanwu LJ, Kashibu E, Edwin CP, Mohammad AM. Microbiologyof smegma in boys in Kano, Nigeria. J Surg Res. 2012;173:21-5.
Balci M, Tuncel A, Baran I, Guzel O, Keten T, Aksu N, et al. High-risk oncogenic human Papilloma virus infection of the foreskin and microbiology of smegma in prepubertal boys. Urology. 2015;86:368-72.
Chung JM, Park CS1, Lee SD. Microbiology of smegma: Prospective comparative control study.Investig Clin Urol. 2019;60(2):127-132.
Ghigo JM. Natural conjugative plasmids induce bacterial biofilm development. Nature. 2001;412:442.
Maclennan C, Swingler G, Craig J. Urinary tract infections in infants and children in developing countries in the context of IMCI. Discussion papers on child health 2005. WHO/FCH/CAH/05.11.Availableat:whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2005/WHO_FCH_CAH_05.11.pdf. Accessed March 18, 2011.
American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Quality Improvement, Subcommittee on Urinary Tract Infection. Practice parameter: The diagnosis, treatment, and evaluation of the initial urinary tract infection in febrile infants and young children. Paediatrics. 1999;103:843.
- Abstract Viewed: 0 times
- Pdf/6030 Downloaded: 0 times