CDC circumcision guidelines


The CDC just came out with final recommendations targeting provider counseling regarding male circumcision (see circumcision cdc recommendations 2014​ in dropbox, no URL available at this time). the focus of these recommendations is to help with prevention of HIV, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), etc. They note the following:

--the final decision about male circumcision is not only based on health considerations, but includes a variety of social, cultural, ethical and religious considerations
--3 African studies (with very high baseline prevalence of HIV) have shown a 50-60% decreased risk of HIV transmission with circumcision of men engaged in penile-vaginal sex. additionally, there was a 30% decreased transmission of HSV-2 (herpes simplex virus type-2) and HPV (human papilloma virus). note: most new HIV infections in the US occur in men who have sex with men (MSM), for which there are no data that circumcision is effective.
--their formal recommendations:
    --HIV risk assessment should be done on all who are at risk of acquiring HIV from heterosexual sex (though seems to me that this should include homosexual sex......)
    ​--adolescents and men having heterosexual sex should be informed that circumcision reduces but does not eliminate potential transmission of HIV and other STIs, though there are no data for oral or anal sex. also no data that circumcision reduces risk of transmission to women (though in the US, 10% of new HIV infections are from women to men, so the data suggest these men may benefit)
    --after circumcision, avoid sex until the wound is healed
    --although some epidemiologic data suggest protection by circumcision for MSM who have insertive rectal sex, there are no convincing data to confirm this, and it is biologically unlikely that there is any protection for the anal-receptive partner
--risks and benefits of circumcision should be reviewed with patient​
    --in terms of neonatal circumcision, parents should know that circumcised males are less likely to get urinary tract infections (which are pretty uncommon, anyway), balanitis, HIV/STIs as above, penile cancer (also uncommon) and possibly prostate cancer
    --timing of neonatal circumcision: parents should know that neonatal circumcision is safer and heals more rapidly than when done in older boys and men, and costs less. though most of benefits are after the male is sexually active
    --complications: in newborns up to age 9, <0.5% and mostly bleeding/inflammation/need for corrective procedures. in those >10yo, 5% with complications as above and penile wounds. The American Academy of Pediatrics taskforce states that benefits outweigh risks for families who desire it.

Comments

Post a Comment

if you would like to receive the near-daily emails regularly, please email me at gmodest@uphams.org

Popular posts from this blog

HDL a negative risk factor? or cholesterol efflux??

Although the data on HDL being protective of atherosclerotic disease is pretty consistent, there are negative studies, and the data on medications which dramatically improve HDL levels (eg, the cholesteryl ester transfer protein --CETP --inhibitors, such as torcetrapib) are clinically disappointing. there have been several explanations for this. for example, some HDL particles are "pro-inflammatory" and elicit an atherosclerotic response (which may be related to apolipoprotein C-III). a new article in NEJM highlights another angle -- that the issue is not the HDL number, but HDL's functionality in the reverse transport of cholesterol, as measured by the cholesterol efflux capacity (see  lipids HDL efflux capacity vs amt NEJM 2014 in dropbox, or  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1409065). This article looks at the Dallas Heart Study, where they measured HDL levels, HDL particle concentrations, and cholesterol efflux capacity in 2924 adults free of cardiovascular disease and followed p
Read more

Drug company shenanigans: narcolepsy drug

I have not done a blog for a long time on drug company shenanigans. So it is my great pleasure to bring up a brand-new drug company approach to garner huge amounts of money (see  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/business/jazz-narcolepsy-avadel-patents.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare  ).  Based on an article by  Rebecca Robbins of the New York Times, who has written several articles on drug company excesses   As background, this will be my 42 nd  such blog: for the array, see  https://bucommunitymed.wpengine.com/page/4/?s=drug+company+shenanigans   Th e drug company  approach  this time  to extending  their  patents has a few “interesting” angles: -- this is a medication manufactured by Jazz Pharmaceuticals to treat narcolepsy: there are 2 versions: Xyrem and Xywav (Xywav has less sodium, so is marketed to those who should be on a low sodium diet). These meds are basically derivatives of gammahydroxybutyric acid (GHB)      -- the drug actually has a pretty
Read more

UPDATE: ASCVD risk factor critique

  I decided to do an extensive update of my prior ASCVD (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease) risk analysis and critique of risk calculators, with much more information about the “non-traditional” risk factors. I felt that there should be more data/clarification, since I think we are really undertreating/not preventing the most common cause of death by relying on the ASCVD risk calculators   -- Cardiovascular risk models:      -- many of us rely on the various cardiovascular risk models to determine the appropriate approach to patients, and these are often integrated into the electronic medical records      -- these risk models have several very important limitations:          -- they are typically based on community data, eg from the Framingham study etc. But, in clinical practice, we are dealing with the individual and not the community:              -- there is very clear evidence that there are many individual risk factors that are associated with increased risk of a cardiovascu
Read more