I am writing to develop the points made by Wilkinson and Sigismond regarding the effects of circumcision on intromission and
sexual satisfaction.
The intromission function of the foreskin has been documented by Taves.[1] The foreskin also has a sensory function with a
possible role in the afferent limb of the ejaculatory reflex.[2] It is no longer acceptable to deny that the foreskin is required for
normal sexual function.
Four recent studies have previously reported on the effect on sexual satisfaction following adult circumcision for clinical
indications.[3-6] The results of these are summarised in the table together with a pooling of the data from the four studies.
The four studies reveal a remarkably consistent picture. The pooled data reveal a split into three roughly equal groups of men
having circumcision where there is some reason for them to seek treatment. Only one third report improved satisfaction following
circumcision with a further third reporting worsened sexual satisfaction and the remaining third reporting no effect.
Circumcision can no longer be regarded as insignificant with regard to sexual function. The potential for detriment to sexual
satisfaction must now be disclosed if valid informed consent to the surgery is to be obtained. Children should be protected from
therapeutically unecessary circumcision without prejudice in respect of race, religion or gender.
Table:-
Authors
Year
n
No > Sat
% > Sat
No = Sat
% = Sat
No > Sat
% <Sa
End-Point
Coursey JW, Morey AF, McAninch JW,
Summerton DJ, Secrest C, White P, Miller K,
Pieczonka C, Hochberg D, Armenakas N
5-item version of the
International Index of
Erectile Function
(IIEF-5)
Solinis I, Yiannaki A
2007
123
20
16%
60
49%
43
35%
questionnaire about
the quality of their
sexual life and the
sexual enjoyment
before and after
circumcision.
Pooled data
2008
356
119
33%
124
35%
113
32%
*Coursey and Colleagues pool the results for men reporting Improved satisfaction or no change. For this purpose I have assumed
all these to belong to the improved category.
Rapid Response:
Effect of circumcision on intromission and sexual satisfaction
Author Dalton JD, NORM-UK Stone, Staffs, UK ST15 0SF
I am writing to develop the points made by Wilkinson and Sigismond regarding the effects of circumcision on intromission and
sexual satisfaction.
The intromission function of the foreskin has been documented by Taves.[1] The foreskin also has a sensory function with a
possible role in the afferent limb of the ejaculatory reflex.[2] It is no longer acceptable to deny that the foreskin is required for
normal sexual function.
Four recent studies have previously reported on the effect on sexual satisfaction following adult circumcision for clinical
indications.[3-6] The results of these are summarised in the table together with a pooling of the data from the four studies.
The four studies reveal a remarkably consistent picture. The pooled data reveal a split into three roughly equal groups of men
having circumcision where there is some reason for them to seek treatment. Only one third report improved satisfaction following
circumcision with a further third reporting worsened sexual satisfaction and the remaining third reporting no effect.
Circumcision can no longer be regarded as insignificant with regard to sexual function. The potential for detriment to sexual
satisfaction must now be disclosed if valid informed consent to the surgery is to be obtained. Children should be protected from
therapeutically unecessary circumcision without prejudice in respect of race, religion or gender.
Table:-
Authors
Year
n
No > Sat
% > Sat
No = Sat
% = Sat
No > Sat
% <Sa
End-Point
Coursey JW, Morey AF, McAninch JW,
Summerton DJ, Secrest C, White P, Miller K,
Pieczonka C, Hochberg D, Armenakas N
2001
22
16
73%
NR*
NR*
6
27%
Validated
Questionnaire
Fink KS, Carson CC, DeVellis RF
2002
123
50
50%
25
12%
48
38%
Items taken from
various existing
questionnaires
Masood S, Patel HR, Himpson RC, Palmer
JH, Mufti GR, Sheriff MK
2005
88
33
38%
39
44%
16
18%
5-item version of the
International Index of
Erectile Function
(IIEF-5)
Solinis I, Yiannaki A
2007
123
20
16%
60
49%
43
35%
questionnaire about
the quality of their
sexual life and the
sexual enjoyment
before and after
circumcision.
Pooled data
2008
356
119
33%
124
35%
113
32%
*Coursey and Colleagues pool the results for men reporting Improved satisfaction or no change. For this purpose I have assumed
all these to belong to the improved category.
References:-
1. Taves D. The intromission function of the foreskin. Med Hypotheses. 2002; 59(2):180.
2. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The Prepuce: Specialized Mucosa of the Penis and its Loss to Circumcision. BJU Int.
1996; 77:291-295.
3. Coursey JW, Morey AF, McAninch JW, Summerton DJ, Secrest C, White P, Miller K, Pieczonka C, Hochberg D, Armenakas
N. Erectile function after anterior urethroplasty. J Urol. 2001; 166(6):2273-6.
4. Fink KS, Carson CC, DeVellis RF. Adult Circumcision Outcomes Study: Effect on Erectile Function, Penile Sensitivity, Sexual
Activity and Satisfaction. J Urol. 2002; 167(5):2113-6.
5. Masood S, Patel HR, Himpson RC, Palmer JH, Mufti GR, Sheriff MK. Penile sensitivity and sexual satisfaction after
circumcision: are we informing men correctly? Urol Int. 2005; 75(1):62-6.
6. Solinis I, Yiannak A. Does circumcision improve couple’s sexual life? J Mens Health Gend. 2007; 4(3):361.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: