RESUMEN
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To compare the effect and safety of Shang Ring circumcision with those of conventional circumcision in the treatment of redundant prepuce or phimosis.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>We retrieved the randomized controlled trials on Shang Ring circumcision and conventional circumcision for the treatment of redundant prepuce or phimosis published at home and abroad. Relevant data were selected according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews by two reviewers after quality evaluation of the included trials, and the statistical software RevMan 5.0 was used for meta analysis.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Totally 8 randomized controlled trials with 2277 cases were included in this study. Compared with conventional circumcision, Shang Ring circumcision showed a shorter operation time (SMD = -5.82, 95% CI [ -7.39, -4.24], P<0.00001), less intraoperative blood loss (SMD = -3.28, 95% CI [ -3.47, -3.09], P<0.00001), lower rate of infection (OR = 0.44, 95% CI [0.26, 0.72], P=0.001), lower rate of postoperative bleeding (OR =0.05, 95% CI [0.02, 0.12], P<0.00001), higher rate of satisfaction with the postoperative penile appearance (OR=12.72, 95% CI [1.30, 124.56], P=0.03), lower intraoperative pain score (SMD = -3.32, 95% CI [ -3.50, -3.14], P<0.00001), and lower 24-hour-postoperative pain score (SMD = -3.28, 95% CI [ - 3.47, - 3.00], P<0.00001), but longer wound healing time (OR=1.46, 95% CI [1.03, 1.90], P<0.00001).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>In comparison with conventional circumcision, Shang Ring circumcision has the advantages of shorter operation time, fewer complications, mild pain, and higher rate of satisfaction with the postoperative penile appearance. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials with large samples are required to lend further support to our findings.</p>