ShangRing versus Mogen clamp for early infant male circumcision in eastern sub-Saharan Africa: a multicentre, non-inferiority, adaptive, randomised controlled trial.

Spyridon P Basourakos, Quincy G Nang, Karla V Ballman, Omar Al Hussein Al Awamlh, Nahid Punjani, Kaylee Ho, Mark A Barone, Quentin D Awori, Daniel Ouma, Jairus Oketch, Alice E Christensen, Augustino Hellar, Maende Makokha, Alphonce Isangu, Robert Salim, Jackson Lija, Ronald H Gray, Stephen Kiboneka, Aggrey Anok, Godfrey Kigozi, Regina Nakabuye, Charles Ddamulira, Andrew Mulooki, Silas Odiya, Rose Nazziwa, Marc Goldstein, Philip S Li, Richard K Lee
{"title":"ShangRing versus Mogen clamp for early infant male circumcision in eastern sub-Saharan Africa: a multicentre, non-inferiority, adaptive, randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Spyridon P Basourakos,&nbsp;Quincy G Nang,&nbsp;Karla V Ballman,&nbsp;Omar Al Hussein Al Awamlh,&nbsp;Nahid Punjani,&nbsp;Kaylee Ho,&nbsp;Mark A Barone,&nbsp;Quentin D Awori,&nbsp;Daniel Ouma,&nbsp;Jairus Oketch,&nbsp;Alice E Christensen,&nbsp;Augustino Hellar,&nbsp;Maende Makokha,&nbsp;Alphonce Isangu,&nbsp;Robert Salim,&nbsp;Jackson Lija,&nbsp;Ronald H Gray,&nbsp;Stephen Kiboneka,&nbsp;Aggrey Anok,&nbsp;Godfrey Kigozi,&nbsp;Regina Nakabuye,&nbsp;Charles Ddamulira,&nbsp;Andrew Mulooki,&nbsp;Silas Odiya,&nbsp;Rose Nazziwa,&nbsp;Marc Goldstein,&nbsp;Philip S Li,&nbsp;Richard K Lee","doi":"10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00326-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Use of medical devices represents a unique opportunity to facilitate scale-up of early infant male circumcision (EIMC) across sub-Saharan Africa. The ShangRing, a circumcision device prequalified by WHO, is approved for use in adults and adolescents and requires topical anaesthesia only. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of the ShangRing versus the Mogen clamp for EIMC in infants across eastern sub-Saharan Africa.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this multicentre, non-inferiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial, we enrolled healthy male infants (aged <60 days), with a gestational age of at least 37 weeks and a birthweight of at least 2·5 kg, from 11 community and referral centres in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated text message service to undergo EIMC by either the ShangRing or the Mogen clamp. The primary endpoint was safety, defined as the number and severity of adverse events (AEs), analysed in the intention-to-treat population (all infants who underwent an EIMC procedure) with a non-inferiority margin of 2% for the difference in moderate and severe AEs. This trial is registered with Clinical.</p><p><strong>Trials: </strong>gov, NCT03338699, and is complete.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Between Sept 17, 2018, and Dec 20, 2019, a total of 1420 infants were assessed for eligibility, of whom 1378 (97·0%) were enrolled. 689 (50·0%) infants were randomly assigned to undergo EIMC by ShangRing and 689 (50·0%) by Mogen clamp. 43 (6·2%) adverse events were observed in the ShangRing group and 61 (8·9%) in the Mogen clamp group (p=0·078). The most common treatment-related AE was intraoperative pain (Neonatal Infant Pain Scale score ≥5), with 19 (2·8%) events in the ShangRing and 23 (3·3%) in the Mogel clamp group. Rates of moderate and severe AEs were similar between both groups (29 [4·2%] in the ShangRing group vs 30 [4·4%] in the Mogen clamp group; difference -0·1%; one-sided 95% CI upper limit of 1·7%; p=0·89). No treatment-related deaths were reported.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Use of the ShangRing device for EIMC showed safety, achieved high caregiver satisfaction, and did not differ from the Mogen clamp in other key measures. The ShangRing could be used by health systems and international organisations to further scale up EIMC across sub-Saharan Africa.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.</p>","PeriodicalId":153380,"journal":{"name":"The Lancet. Global health","volume":" ","pages":"e1514-e1522"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9638032/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lancet. Global health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00326-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Use of medical devices represents a unique opportunity to facilitate scale-up of early infant male circumcision (EIMC) across sub-Saharan Africa. The ShangRing, a circumcision device prequalified by WHO, is approved for use in adults and adolescents and requires topical anaesthesia only. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of the ShangRing versus the Mogen clamp for EIMC in infants across eastern sub-Saharan Africa.

Methods: In this multicentre, non-inferiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial, we enrolled healthy male infants (aged <60 days), with a gestational age of at least 37 weeks and a birthweight of at least 2·5 kg, from 11 community and referral centres in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated text message service to undergo EIMC by either the ShangRing or the Mogen clamp. The primary endpoint was safety, defined as the number and severity of adverse events (AEs), analysed in the intention-to-treat population (all infants who underwent an EIMC procedure) with a non-inferiority margin of 2% for the difference in moderate and severe AEs. This trial is registered with Clinical.

Trials: gov, NCT03338699, and is complete.

Findings: Between Sept 17, 2018, and Dec 20, 2019, a total of 1420 infants were assessed for eligibility, of whom 1378 (97·0%) were enrolled. 689 (50·0%) infants were randomly assigned to undergo EIMC by ShangRing and 689 (50·0%) by Mogen clamp. 43 (6·2%) adverse events were observed in the ShangRing group and 61 (8·9%) in the Mogen clamp group (p=0·078). The most common treatment-related AE was intraoperative pain (Neonatal Infant Pain Scale score ≥5), with 19 (2·8%) events in the ShangRing and 23 (3·3%) in the Mogel clamp group. Rates of moderate and severe AEs were similar between both groups (29 [4·2%] in the ShangRing group vs 30 [4·4%] in the Mogen clamp group; difference -0·1%; one-sided 95% CI upper limit of 1·7%; p=0·89). No treatment-related deaths were reported.

Interpretation: Use of the ShangRing device for EIMC showed safety, achieved high caregiver satisfaction, and did not differ from the Mogen clamp in other key measures. The ShangRing could be used by health systems and international organisations to further scale up EIMC across sub-Saharan Africa.

Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

ShangRing与Mogen钳在撒哈拉以南非洲东部的早期男婴包皮环切:一项多中心、非劣效性、适应性、随机对照试验。
背景:医疗器械的使用是促进撒哈拉以南非洲地区扩大早期男婴包皮环切(EIMC)的独特机会。尚灵是一种经世卫组织预审合格的包皮环切器,被批准用于成人和青少年,只需要局部麻醉。我们的目的是研究ShangRing与Mogen钳对撒哈拉以南非洲东部婴儿EIMC的安全性和有效性。方法:在这项多中心、非劣效性、开放标签、随机对照试验中,我们招募了健康的男性婴儿(Trials: gov, NCT03338699)。结果:在2018年9月17日至2019年12月20日期间,共有1420名婴儿被评估为合格,其中1378名(97.0%)被纳入研究。随机分配689例(50.0%)婴儿采用尚灵钳进行EIMC, 689例(50.0%)采用Mogen钳进行EIMC。尚灵组不良事件43例(6.2%),Mogen钳组61例(8.9%)(p= 0.078)。最常见的治疗相关AE是术中疼痛(新生儿疼痛量表评分≥5),尚灵组有19例(2.8%),Mogel钳组有23例(3.3%)。两组间中度和重度不良事件发生率相似(尚灵组29例[4.2%],Mogen钳组30例[4.4%];差0·1%;单侧95% CI上限为1.7%;p = 0·89)。没有与治疗相关的死亡报告。解释:尚灵钳用于EIMC显示出安全性,获得了较高的护理者满意度,并且在其他关键措施上与Mogen钳没有区别。“尚灵”可以被卫生系统和国际组织用来进一步扩大撒哈拉以南非洲地区的EIMC。资助:比尔及梅琳达·盖茨基金会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信