[Prepuce in boys and adolescents: what when, and how?].

INTRODUCTION: The prepuce envelops the glans as a variant of a mucocutaneous tissue presenting with a lot offunctions, the most important of them being to protect the infant's glans from feces and ammonia in diapers, to protect the glans from abrasions and trauma throughout life, and to provide sufficient skin in erection. Circumcision was recognized as a method of solving foreskin problems a long time before Christ. Practicing male circumcision in history was customary several thousand years ago and has spread worldwide. Today it depends on races, and it is often an initiation ceremony near the age of puberty. In everyday practice in pediatric urology outpatient department the foreskin problems have been noticed as a phimosis in 9.91% cases and prepuce adhesions in 3.98%. Congenital anomalies are present in different numbers. Other problems, such as paraphimosis, balanoposthitis, are recorded as accidental cases. Over-all prepuce pathology can be observed in 12%-25% of patients. The article presents a review of foreskin conditions, clinical manifestation, therapy and arguments for patient's benefits. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: The term phimnosis describes a foreskin that is unable to retract. It is necessary to distinguish normal anatomic situation in neonate and infantile period, when prepuce has not been separated yet from true pathologic phimosis due to fibrosis and sclerosis. Up to six years of age the tip of the prepuce is elastic and might be retracted by gentle manipulations. In cases when the foreskin is trapped behind the glans penis and cannot be pulled back to normal position, paraphimosis is present and can be treated as a medical emergency by manual manipulation, or by dorsal slit (incision). Many studies have demonstrated that frequency of urinary tract infection increases in uncircumcised males and that is a reason for routine circumcision. The others are against routine circumcision. The contraindications are newborns, especially prematurely born. and congenital penile anomalies. Condition in which the frenulunm of penis is short with consequent restriction of movement of the prepuce can be easily treated by frenulotomy. Hooded prepuce is a condition of incomplete circumferential formation of foreskin with a dorsal component present and ventral component absent. In cases without any penile anomalies this is only a cosmetically unattractive appearance and could be corrected by circumcision. Infection of the foreskin due to bacterial colonization could be both prevented and treated easily However, an infection due to peno-preputial incisions in adolescent age is serious and has to be cured promptly. CONCLUSION: As a part of external genitalia, the foreskin has a lot of functions. Despite its natural role many advocates routine circumcision due to problematic condition that can develop. Routine circumcision is not generally recommended. Improved education for physicians and parents with regard to the foreskin development and management is required.

[Historical review of congenital foot deformity treatment].

INTRODUCTION: There is still no good solution for the treatment of all the forms of clubfoot. HISTORY OF THE TREATMENT IN THE WORLD: The first written description of the treatment of this deformity was given by Hippocrates. In the Middle Ages, Galenus, Celsus and Averroe only reviewed the lessons of Hippocrates's principles. The first description of orthopedic prosthetic for the treatment of clubfoot was published in "Opera Chirurgica" by Amboise Peréa in 1575. In 1796, Bruckner wrote the first monography about clubfoot. The biggest contribution to the modern way of treating clubfoot was given by Abel Mix Phelebs, who described the medial "release" in 1890. Since 1980 an advantage has been given to early non-operative treatment. The progressive operative approach (use of "release procedures") was introduced. THE HISTORY OF TREATMENT IN OUR COUNTRY: The first procedures were performed by D. Jovcic and S. Stojanovic in Belgrade in 1937. In the period from 1960 to 1970, more and more orthopedic and pediatric surgeons became interested in clubfoot treatment. In 1970 one of the main topics of the 5th Congress of Orthopedics and Traumatology in Belgrade was "Foot Surgery". Many specialists from Belgrade were engaged in clubfoot treatment: D. Rakic, S. Rajic, S. Popovic, L. Stojanovic among pediatricians, and B. Radulovic, P. Klisic among orthopedic surgeons, as well as R. Brdar, Z. Vukasinovic and G. Cobeljic with their assistants. In Novi Sad, in 1967, D. Pajic began diagnosis and treatment of clubfoot. Very soon D. Pajic became a symbol of clubfoot treatment followed by hardworking assistants L. Petkovic and V. Tomasevic. CONCLUSION: The treatment of clubfoot is still controversial and continues to be one of the most interesting fields in pediatric orthopedics.

[Pediatric femur fractures, epidemiology and treatment].

BACKGROUND/AIM: Femur fractures in children most often occur as a consequence of traffic accidents, during play and sport activities, and due to different pathological states. Diagnosis is rather simple and it includes physical and radiographical examination. Femur fractures treatment in children can be operative and unoperative, depending on several facts: age, localisation and type of fracture, joint injuries of soft tissues, the presence of other injuries (in polytrauma), economical and social aspects, ect. The aim of this study was to present epidemiological characteristics of pediatric femur fractures, that is in the stage of development, including a special analysis of the used treatment techniques, as well as the comparison of the obtained data with those from the literature. METHODS: The evaluation included following parameters: age, gender, cause, localisation and type of femur fracture, applied treatment and hospitalisation duration. RESULTS: Among the presented 143 patients with femur fracture, 109 were boys and 34 were girls (3.2:1 ratio; p = 0.0001). Average age for both genders was 8.6 years, and no difference between boys and girls were found for the age (p = 0.758). In total, the most common fracture was diaphyseal fracture of femur in 93 (65.03%) patients. The second was proximal fracture in 30 (20.98%) patients, and the last distal fracture of the femur in 20 (13.99%) patients (p = 0.0001). Three main causes of femur fracture can be distinguished: during play and sport activities in 67 (46.8%) children, in traffic accidents in 64 (44.8%) children, and pathological fractures in 12 (8.4%) children. Inoperative treatment was applied in 82 (57.3%) patients, and operative one in 61 (42.7%) patients. The most common treatment was traction, in 71 (49.6%) patients, followed by immobilization by hip spica cast mostly in young children. Intramedullar elastic nailing was applied in 16 (11.2%) cases, and intra-medullar rigid nailing (Küntscher) in 19 (13.3%) cases. Significantly longer hospitalization period was detected after traction (21 days) comparing to other ways of treatment, mainly operative or hip spica cast (5 to 10 days). CONCLUSION: In young children the standard treatment was hip spica cast after traction. Intramedullar elastic nailing is a modern trend accepted as standard in our approach to femur fracture treatment in children.