Chapter Two: The Prepuce
        One must understand the nature and function of the        structure that is amputated by circumcision in order to        properly evaluate the effects of male circumcision. This        chapter provides that information.       
General Description       
        The prepuce traditionally has been described as a simple        fold of skin,1 for which        the purpose and function are unknown. This is        inaccurate. In reality, the prepuce is a complex        structure with multiple anatomical and physiological        functions.2       
        The prepuce is a portion of the entire covering of the        penis. It is specialized tissue, composed of skin,        mucosa, nerves, blood vessels, and muscle        fibers.2 It is anchored by        the abdominal wall at the proximal end of the penis and        at the proximal end of the glans penis. It is not        attached to the shaft of the penis, so, after puberty,        it is free to slide back and forth, everting and        inverting as it does.3 The        sliding/rolling back and forth is called the gliding        action.3,4       
        A frenulum is found on the ventral side of the penis.        The frenulum serves to tether a movable structure to a        non-movable structure. The penile frenulum returns the        foreskin to its normal protective forward        position.2 Most men report        that the frenulum is highly erogenous tissue.       
Peripenic Muscle       
        In the skin of the penis, there is a sheath of dartos        fascia muscle fibers — the peripenic        muscle.2,3,5 The muscle        fibers keep the prepuce snug against the glans        penis.3 The fibers of the        peripenic muscle sheath form a whorl at the tip of the        prepuce, which act as a sphincter,3 especially in infants and children.        The sphincter also serves to prevent inadvertent        retraction of the prepuce. The peripenic muscle gives        the prepuce great elasticity, allows it to stretch, and        helps to return the prepuce to its forward, protective        position after retraction.2        The elasticity of the prepuce plays an important role in        the erogenous and sexual functions of the prepuce.       
Immunology       
        The prepuce covers and protects the glans penis and        urinary meatus. In most males, the prepuce protects the        sterile urinary tract environment in infancy and        maintains the moistness — beneficial to good        health — of the mucosal surface of the glans penis        throughout life.6 Fleiss         et al. (1998) have identified immunological        functions that help to protect the body from        pathogens:7       
- sphincter action of the preputial orifice functions like a one-way valve, allowing urine to flow out but preventing the entry of infectious contaminants;
 - apocrine glands of the inner prepuce, which secrete lysozyme, an enzyme that breaks down cell walls of pathogens (and also acts against HIV8);
 - sub-preputial moisture that lubricates and protects the mucosa of the glans penis; and
 - high vascularity to bring phagocytes to fight infection.
 
        The epidermis of the prepuce contains Langerhans cells        that secrete cytokines,2        hormone-like low-molecular-weight proteins, which        regulate the intensity and duration of immune        responses.9 de Witte and        colleagues (2007) report that the Langerhans cells        produce langerin, a substance that provides a        barrier to HIV infection.10       
Innervation       
        The prepuce of the newborn male has extensive        innervation. Winkelmann (1956) reported, “[t]he        principal form of innervation of human newborn prepuce        consists of a deep and superficial network of nerve        fibres in the dermis.”11 Moldwin & Valderrama (1989)        reported an extensive neuronal network in the        prepuce.12       
        The prepuce of adult males is even more extensively        innervated. Winkelmann (1959) described the prepuce as a         specific erogenous zone with nerves arranged near        the surface in rete ridges.13 Taylor et al. (1996) also        found nerves near the surface in rete ridges and further        described a concentration of nerve endings in a ring of        ridged tissue just inside the tip of the prepuce near        the mucocutaneous boundary, which he named the ridged        band.14 The nerve        endings in the ridged band are Meissner's corpuscles and        Krause's end-bulbs.       
        The nerves of the penis, including the preputial nerves,        supply sensory input to both the somatosensory and        autonomic nervous systems by different        routes.2 The sensory input        to the somatosensory nervous system is supplied through        the dorsal nerve of the penis, and the autonomic nervous        system is supplied through the parasympathetic nerves,        which run adjacent to and through the wall of the        membranous urethra.       
        The prepuce is provided with an extensive vascular        network to bring oxygen to support the heavy        innervation.2,7,14       
        Several writers have commented on the sensitivity of the        prepuce. Winkelmann (1956) wrote, “…it is a        region of great sensitivity and possessed of an abundant        nerve supply,”11 and        later (1959) identified the prepuce as a specific        erogenous zone.13        Falliers (1970) noted the “sensory pleasure        associated with tactile stimulation of the        foreskin.”15 A        landmark study by Sorrells et al. (2007) of the        fine-touch sensitivity of the penis finds that the areas        most sensitive to fine touch are on the        foreskin.16 Circumcision,        therefore, amputates the most sensitive areas of the        penis.       
Sexual Function       
        The prepuce is primary, erogenous tissue necessary for        normal sexual function.2 In        adult life, the gliding action facilitates        introitus4 and reduces        friction and chafing during coitus.5 The movement and stretching of the        prepuce during coitus stimulate the nerve endings in the        prepuce, produce erogenous sensation, and eventually        ejaculation.18,19 The        presence of the prepuce tends to protect the corona of        the glans penis from direct stimulation, helps to        prevent premature ejaculation20,21 and contributes to female        satisfaction.22 (See         Chapter Six for a discussion of the        sexual harm of prepuce excision.)       
Natural Development       
        The great majority of newborn infant boys are born with        the inner surface of the prepuce fused with the        glans.2 In addition, the        tip of the prepuce at birth usually is too narrow to        allow retraction. The duration of these conditions vary        with the individual but can last until the completion of        puberty or longer. For these two reasons, the        non-retractile foreskin is normal in childhood and        adolescence and cannot be considered a disease requiring        treatment.       
        The first data on development of the retractile prepuce        was provided in 1949 by British pediatrician Douglas        Gairdner.22 Gairdner said        80 percent of boys have a retractable foreskin by the        age of two years, and 90 percent of boys have a        retractable prepuce by the age three. His erroneous        information23 has been        incorporated into medical textbooks and medical school        curricula for decades, and it still is repeated in        medical literature today.24       
        Gairdner’s data are inaccurate23-25 and, unfortunately, most        healthcare providers have been taught this inaccurate        information,24,25 which        contributes to improper diagnosis of “pathological        phimosis” in the healthy, normal, non-retractile        foreskin. Retractability usually occurs much later than        previously believed.2,24,25        About 44 percent of boys have a fully retractable        prepuce by age 10-112,27,28,29 and about 95 percent have a        fully retractable prepuce by age 18.2,27 Non-retractile foreskin is the more        common condition until 10-11 years of age. Thorvaldsen        & Meyhoff (2005) report that the mean age of first        foreskin retraction is 10.4 years.29 Non-retractile foreskin in childhood        and adolescence is not a disease and does not require        treatment.       
        Ballooning of the prepuce in childhood during urination        is harmless and self-limiting. Babu et al. (2004)        have shown that ballooning does not cause        obstructed voiding.30        Ballooning disappears with increasing maturity. No        treatment is required.31       
References       
- Williams PL, Warwick R, Dyson M et al. (eds): Gray's Anatomy, 37th ed, Churchill Livingstone, New York, 1989: 1432
 - Cold CJ, Taylor JR. The prepuce. BJU Int 1999;83 Suppl. 1:34–44. [Full Text]
 - Lakshmanan S., Prakash S. Human prepuce: some aspects of structure and function. Indian J Surg 1980;44:134–7. [Full Text]
 - Warren J, Bigelow J. The case against circumcision. Br J Sex Med 1994;21:6–8. [Full Text]
 - Jefferson G. The peripenic muscle; some observations on the anatomy of phimosis. Surg Gynecol Obstet (Chicago) 1916;23(2):177–81. [Full Text]
 - Parkash S, Raghuram R, Venkatesan, et al. Sub-preputial wetness - Its nature. Ann Nat Med Sci (India) 1982;18(3):109–12. [Full Text]
 - Fleiss P, Hodges F, Van Howe RS. Immunological functions of the human prepuce. Sex Trans Inf 1998;74(5):364–7. [Full Text]
 - Lee-Huang S, Huang PL, Sun Y, et al. Lysozyme and RNases as anti-HIV components in beta-core preparations of human chorionic gonadotropin. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999;96(6):2678–81. [Full Text]
 - Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, 26th edition, q.v. "cytokine."
 - de Witte L, Nabatov A, Pion M, et al. Langerin is a natural barrier to HIV-1 transmission by Langerhans cells. Nat Med 2007;13:367–371. [Abstract]
 - Winkelmann RK. The cutaneous innervation of human newborn prepuce. J Invest Dermatol 1956 26(1):53–67. [Full Text]
 - Moldwin RM, Valderrama E. Immunochemical analysis of nerve distribution patterns within prepucial tissue. J Urol 1989;141(4) Part 2:499A. [Abstract]
 - Winkelmann RK. The erogenous zones: their nerve supply and significance. Mayo Clin Proc 1959;34(2):39–47. [Full Text]
 - Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291–5. [Full Text]
 - Falliers CJ. Circumcision (letter). JAMA 1970;214(12):2194. [Full Text]
 - Sorrells ML, Snyder JL, Reiss MD, et al. Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis. BJU Int 2007;99:864–9. [Full Text]
 - Taves D. The intromission function of the foreskin. Med Hypotheses 2002;59(2):180.
 - Taylor JR. Letter. Can Fam Physician 2003;49:1592. [Full Text]
 - Taylor JR. Fine touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis (letter). BJU Int 2007;100(1):218. [Full Text]
 - Zwang G. Functional and erotic consequences of sexual mutilations. In: Denniston GC and Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy New York and London: Plenum Press, 1997.
 - O'Hara K, O'Hara J. The effect of male circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner. BJU Int 1999;83 Suppl 1:79–84.
 - Gairdner D. The fate of the foreskin: a study of circumcision. Br Med J 1949;2:1433–7. [Full Text]
 - Wright JE. Further to the "Further Fate of the Foreskin." Med J Aust 1994; 160: 134–5. [Full Text]
 - Hill G. Circumcision for phimosis and other medical indications in Western Australian boys. Med J Aust 2003;178(11):587. [Full Text]
 - Hill G. Triple incision plasty to treat phimosis: an alternative to circumcision BJU Int 2004;93:636. [Full Text]
 - Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin: incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys. Arch Dis Child 1968;43:200–3. [Full Text]
 - Kayaba H, Tamura H, Kitajima S, et al. Analysis of shape and retractability of the prepuce in 603 Japanese boys. J Urol 1996;156(5):1813–5. [Full Text]
 - Morales Concepción JC, Cordies Jackson E, Guerra Rodriguez M, et al. ¿Debe realizarse circuncisión en la infancia? Arch Esp Urol 2002;55(7):807–11. [Abstract]
 - Thorvaldsen MA, Meyhoff H. Patologisk eller fysiologisk fimose? Ugeskr Læger 2005;167(17):1858–62. [Abstract]
 - Babu R, Harrison SK, Hutton KA. Ballooning of the foreskin and physiological phimosis: is there any objective evidence of obstructed voiding? BJU Int 2004;94(3):384–7. [Full Text]
 - Simpson ET, Barraclough P. The management of the paediatric foreskin. Aust Fam Physician 1998;27(5):381–3. [Full Text]
 
