Attempted Self-Circumcision Using a Non-Medically Approved Device Purchased Online: A Case Report
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66687/jebmr.2.1.2026.26Keywords:
circumcision complications, self-harm, internet-purchased device, self-circumcision, CircumcisionAbstract
Background: Circumcision is a common urological procedure with established medical, cultural, and religious indications when performed by trained practitioners in an appropriate clinical setting. Self-circumcision using internet-purchased devices is uncommon but clinically important because it may cause uncontrolled bleeding, tissue loss, urethral injury, infection, psychological distress, and delayed presentation. This case is reported to highlight the emergency management and public health implications of online access to non-medically approved circumcision devices.
Case Presentation: A 48-year-old male presented to the emergency department 24 hours after attempting circumcision at home using a preputial stapler and cutting device purchased from an online marketplace. He reported ongoing bleeding, pain, and partially detached preputial and penile shaft skin. Clinical assessment showed a circumferential penile shaft wound with retained staples, exposed shaft tissue, and a cut approximately 7-8 mm proximal to the usual circumcision line. Blood and urine investigations were reported as normal. The patient was counselled and consented for emergency surgical repair. In theatre, staples were removed, haemostasis was secured, and primary wound repair/reconstruction was performed. A mental health assessment was completed during admission.
Conclusion: Self-circumcision using devices purchased online may result in significant penile injury requiring urgent urological assessment. Emergency clinicians should document haemodynamic status, wound extent, glans and urethral integrity, infection risk, operative management, mental health assessment, and follow-up outcomes.
References
Malone P, Steinbrecher H. Medical aspects of male circumcision. BMJ. 2007 Dec 8;335(7631):1206-90. doi:10.1136/bmj.39385.382708.AD. PMID:18063645; PMCID:PMC2128632.
Hall DE, Prochazka AV, Fink AS. Informed consent for clinical treatment. CMAJ. 2012 Mar 20;184(5):533-40. doi:10.1503/cmaj.112120. PMID:22392947; PMCID:PMC3307558.
Kintu-Luwaga R. The emerging trend of self-circumcision and the need to define cause: Case report of a 21-year-old male. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2016;25:225-8. doi:10.1016/j.ijscr.2016.06.011. PMID:27399167; PMCID:PMC4941114.
Rogers T, Mostafa O, Mostafa H, Suttle T. Circumventing the Urologist: A Case of Poorly Executed Self-Circumcision. J Urol Surg. 2016;3(2):51-53. doi:10.4274/jus.2015.574.
Krill AJ, Palmer LS, Palmer JS. Complications of circumcision. ScientificWorldJournal. 2011;11:2458-68. doi:10.1100/2011/373829. PMID:22235177; PMCID:PMC3253617.
Rogers BA, Pease F, Ricketts DM. The surgical management of patients who deliberately self-harm. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2009 Jan;91(1):59-62. doi:10.1308/003588409X359204. PMID:18990265; PMCID:PMC2752246.
Koç A. A novel complication of self-circumcision: penile skin avulsion. Turk J Urol. 2011;37(2):177-179. doi:10.5152/tud.2011.034.
Natali A, Rossetti MA. Complications of self-circumcision: a case report and proposal. J Sex Med. 2008;5(12):2970-2972.
Gagnier JJ, Kienle G, Altman DG, Moher D, Sox H, Riley D, CARE Group. The CARE Guidelines: Consensus-based Clinical Case Reporting Guideline Development. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(1):46-51. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.003.
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Regulating medical devices in the UK. GOV.UK.




