Rabbit oral papillomavirus complete genome sequence and immunity following genital infection.
Rabbit oral papillomavirus (ROPV) infects mucosal tissues of domestic rabbits. The viral genomic sequence has been determined and the most related papillomavirus type was the cutaneous cottontail rabbit papillomavirus (CRPV). Homologies between the open reading frames (ORFs) of ROPV and CRPV, however, ranged from 68% amino acid identity for L1 to only 23% identity for E4. Shared features unique to the two rabbit viruses included a large E6 ORF and a small E8 ORF that overlapped the E6 ORF. Serological responses to ROPV L1 viruslike particles (VLPs) were detected in rabbits infected at either the genital or oral mucosa with ROPV. The antibody response was specific to intact ROPV L1 VLP antigen, was first detected at the time of late regression, and persisted at high levels for several months after complete regression. Both oral and genital lesions regressed spontaneously, accompanied by a heavy infiltrate of lymphocytes. ROPV infection of rabbit genital mucosa is a useful model to study host immunological responses to genital papillomavirus infections. (+info)
Syphilitic balanitis of Follmann developing after the appearance of the primary chancre. A case report.
A case of primary syphilitic chancre of the coronal sulcus with subsequent development of syphilitic balanitis of Follmann is described. The histopathological picture and preponderantly intraepidermal localization of T. pallidum in the lesions is discussed. (+info)
Circumcision: a refined technique and 5 year review.
The vast majority of circumcisions currently performed in the UK are for phimosis or balanitis and the patients are not looking for the denuded glans appearance of a ritual circumcision. We present a refinement of the sleeve technique of circumcision, which involves Horton's test to define the proximal incision margin, and bipolar electro-dissection. A review of all patients undergoing circumcision at the Wordsley Plastic Surgery Unit, in a 5-year period, has shown this technique to be safe with a haematoma rate of only 1.4%, and an overall complication rate of 3%. (+info)
Troubles with the foreskin: one hundred consecutive referrals to paediatric surgeons.
To assess the reasons for and outcomes of referrals concerning the foreskin, 100 consecutive patients seen in paediatric clinics were followed to discharge. 18 referrals were for circumcision on religious grounds. Of the other 82, the main reason for referral was non-retractability or phimosis. At clinic, 24 (29%) of these were deemed normal for age, 31 (38%) were treated with topical steroid (successfully in 25), 9 (11%) were listed for preputioplasty, 7 (9%) were listed for adhesiolysis, 7 (9%) were listed for circumcision, and 4 were listed for other forms of surgery. 6 patients were identified as having balanitis xerotica obliterans (BXO), a condition that had not been suggested on referral. With the advent of new treatments for foreskin disorders, circumcision is decreasingly necessary. Knowledge of the natural history of the foreskin, and the use of topical steroids, could shift the management of paediatric foreskin problems from the hospital outpatient department to primary care. BXO is not sufficiently recognized as a form of phimosis that requires operation. (+info)
Pathologic and physiologic phimosis: approach to the phimotic foreskin.
OBJECTIVE: To review the differences between physiologic and pathologic phimosis, review proper foreskin care, and discuss when it is appropriate to seek consultation regarding a phimotic foreskin. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: This paper is based on selected findings from a MEDLINE search for literature on phimosis and circumcision referrals and on our experience at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Urology Clinic. MeSH headings used in our MEDLINE search included "phimosis," "referral and consultation," and "circumcision." Most of the available articles about phimosis and foreskin referrals were retrospective reviews and cohort studies (levels II and III evidence). MAIN MESSAGE: Phimosis is defined as the inability to retract the foreskin. Differentiating between physiologic and pathologic phimosis is important, as the former is managed conservatively and the latter requires surgical intervention. Great anxiety exists among patients and parents regarding non-retractile foreskins. Most phimosis referrals seen in pediatric urology clinics are normal physiologically phimotic foreskins. Referrals of patients with physiologic phimosis to urology clinics can create anxiety about the need for surgery among patients and parents, while unnecessarily expanding the waiting list for specialty assessment. Uncircumcised penises require no special care. With normal washing, using soap and water, and gentle retraction during urination and bathing, most foreskins will become retractile over time. CONCLUSION: Physiologic phimosis is often seen by family physicians. These patients and their parents require reassurance of normalcy and reinforcement of proper preputial hygiene. Consultation should be sought when evidence of pathologic phimosis is present, as this requires surgical management. (+info)
Frequency of bacteria, Candida and malassezia species in balanoposthitis.