Rest of foreskin intentionally left?

I had a tight circumcision, I still have the frenulum. However, I have a rest of the foreskin next to the frenulum, it is a piece of skin about 10 mm long and 2 mm wide. I thought it was a mistake of the surgeon. Now I think he did it intentionally, to increase the sensitivity. Has someone the same rest of foreskin?

You can see two photos:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rz6WogRhk1ZnS-0064Z-WDj6vXr9UsYg/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E9ES1O1j7-EQyoRmJVgZKQdzxFsJ11Bs/view?usp=sharing

On the second photo you can see (with a zoom) that the frenulum is not symmetrical. On the left side I have more skin as on the right side, and I suppose that it is the rest of the foreskin intentionally left.

Woyzeck: It was a long time ago and I may be mistaken, but I think it was very much the same with my cousin's penis when we compared wee-wees after his circumcision. I (apparently mistakenly) believed it was true of all circumcisions.

@Pecan_nutjob In some circumcisions the frenulum is entirely removed. I read on another forum that some men who were circumcised in childhood do revisions as adults to improve things they don't like, especially to remove the frenulum.

This is not my intention. I would rather make a piercing in the frenulum for the esthetic.

Yes, I heard about retaining the frenulum or not retaining it (I suppose, if it is so tight that it induces some traction), but I thought that if it was retained, then necessarily there would be like a triangle of skin.

Isn't this part specially sensitive? I think some people on the site said so.

Yes, I heard about retaining the frenulum or not retaining it (I suppose, if it is so tight that it induces some traction), but I thought that if it was retained, then necessarily there would be like a triangle of skin.

Isn't this part specially sensitive? I think some people on the site said so.

The frenulum can be sensitive, especially for intact males.

However, just like the rest of the glans, it can become desensitised by being constantly exposed/uncovered for long periods of time. I've been retracting and keeping my foreskin retracted by various means for long periods of time for many years now, alternating between the two conditions, mainly for the fun of it, but also to experience for myself the difference in sensitivity between the two, since so many ardent circumcision advocates claim there is no loss of sensitivity on circumcision.

Well, for myself I've concluded that that claim is nonsense. Exposure of the glans and frenulum over time does result in an easily noted loss of sensitivity. This includes the frenulum. Also, by keeping a foreskin retracted by use of rings or other devices, this results in a noticeable elongation of the frenulum, which in some cases can otherwise be tight and constricting.

Exposure of the glans and frenulum over time does result in an easily noted loss of sensitivity. This includes the frenulum.

Of course this is true. When the glans is exposed to constant friction, it is only logical that surface sensitivity will decrease.

Of course this is true. When the glans is exposed to constant friction, it is only logical that surface sensitivity will decrease.

Over the years, I wonder how many on zity have ardently argued that circumcision does not result in loss of sensitivity? How many back and forths (if not arguments) haven't there been on the subject? It seems to be a difficult conclusion to admit to, at least if one is a circumcision supporter.

Agracier: There seems to be quite diverse outcome of circumcision, depending on technique used, whether the surgeon left more or les skin, whether it left more or less inner foreskin, whether the frenulum was removed or not. This ranges from people claiming increased sensitivity to decreased sensitivity. Some point to fragility and injuries in the scar area, some don't. Some see decreased sensitivity as a plus for longer intercourse, some as a minus because of difficulties of reaching orgasm, especially in fellation.

I think this should be studied in relation with the kind of circumcision that was performed.

I cannot answer this question about sensitivity since I have never been able to compare before / after.

What I find interesting is that a doctor try to preserve the sensitivity if that is why he left a piece of foreskin. I have never been able to get confirmation that this technique exists.

On another forum I was told about a V Flap circumcision, I'll do some research. I should ask a doctor, I've never dared yet.

What I find interesting is that a doctor try to preserve the sensitivity if that is why he left a piece of foreskin. I have never been able to get confirmation that this technique exists.

The foreskin is essentially a hollow tube composed of skin. There is no reason why it cannot be cut off at any point from the top. Performing a partial circumcision where, say anything from 10 to 20 to 50% of the foreskin is cut off, should not pose any technical problem.

But since many doctors (in the US) do cut it off entirely, one cannot help but wonder if it isn't because of the old bugaboo about wishing to decrease sensitivity to make masturbation less painful.

If a reason for cutting is because of too narrow a foreskin opening, then a partial cut serves just as well, while preserving sensitivity and aesthetics.

I have some of that, probably not as much as yours but some. Not sure how tight mine is, there is some movement of skin when I'm erect, but not a lot.

I just figured they were all that way. I do notice that area with the frenulum is nice and senstive and feels good, so I sure wouldn't go back and have them take it off!

I have the same cut. Think this was a surgeon mistake

I wonder if it's intentional, given that many methods (clamps, etc.) of circumcision don't allow the surgeon to see exactly what and where they're cutting, especially on infants. Just curious, was this an adult circ?

Just curious, was this an adult circ?

@Feesii

No, I was a baby and I don't remember the operation. I was not a newborn, it was a few months after birth, I don't know how many, for medical reasons.

My initial circ left a result a lot like this but a lot less neat than your result. I can only imagine the surgeon left it there on purpose although I'm not sure why, because it was the underside of my foreskin that suffered the most damage when I caught in the zipper.

I remember before my revision that that area would swell a lot and have a very puffy appearance. My revision removed that tissue but still left me with my frenulum as a thin band of skin. I can't say that I've noticed any difference in sensitivity in that area of my penis.

@Woyzeck it just looks like your doc left your fren there although the rest of your circumcision was tight. I have all my frenulum as my circumcision is quite high and my scar starts just at the end of your frenulum. I also had quite a loose one which had some skin overhanging the carona when younger.

I remember when I lived in an apartment complex for about 4 months, there was another boy living downstairs from me. I had just known him for a week, and he showed me a wooded area behind the complex; we talked for a bit, and then he suddenly said that I should go find a “pee place”; the he walked over to a tree with a Y shaped trunk, and pulled his penis out saying “this is my pee place“ then started peeing; I just looked at his penis, I has first thought he was circumcised, but I looked closer, and he had about half of his glans covered with foreskin, as I was looking he did a little shake and pulled his sweats up. I really had to go, so I started to look for a “pee place” in the woods, and i saw a funny shaped rock that I liked. I took my intact penis out, and started to let loose my pee stream; my friend looked closely, and I just stood there relieving myself, I peepeed on and on; if we had done a pee race, he definitely would have won. After my stream stopped, I did about 4 or 5 squirts; then I pulled back my foreskin and said “can you do this?”. He pulled his penis out again and showed me that his foreskin could go back all the way. We were so intrigued that we showed each other every trick and unusual move we could make with our penises, until our dads started calling us to come home.

@woyzeck Looks like what I have! https://en.zity.biz/gallery/image/264543

I had a reasonably loose RIC with a bit of residual foreskin overhanging the frenulum. But as I grew the skin moved back to sit behind the head. I still have my frenulum too. I guess you would call both of these a "remnant"

It seems a forceps guided circumcision with frenular preservation: small differences in traction or clamp placement ventrally easily result in uneven mucosal cuff height at the frenulum zone. It is a technique with very low control and done so early may provide inconsistent results. In the past some did the initial clamping of the prepuce in a dorso-ventral orientation which is not recommended and prone to this results if not bad more (gland damage). Taking into account all of these I think the surgeon did on you a good job.

I asked an AI about this.

Source: Grok 4 (xAI), conversation of December 2025

What you’re describing is an intentional and fairly common surgical technique used by some urologists and surgeons who specialise in aesthetic or functional circumcisions. It is known as a “frenular skin tag” or “frenular delta” (in French: “aile frénulaire” or “languette frénulaire”).

Why does the surgeon deliberately leave this small strip of skin?

• Maximum preservation of sensitivity The area immediately around the frenulum and under the glans is the richest in fine nerve endings (Krause corpuscles, Meissner receptors). By leaving this little tongue of skin (usually 8–12 mm long and 2–3 mm wide), the surgeon keeps a portion of the inner foreskin (the most sensitive part) and the frenular delta, which is extremely erogenous in many men.
• “Cushion” effect during masturbation and intercourse This small piece of skin forms a very mobile small ridge that slides over the coronal sulcus and directly stimulates the frenulum and the underside of the glans. A large number of patients report significantly better sensitivity than with a completely tight (“low and tight”) circumcision where nothing is left.
• Aesthetic reasons Many men (and their partners) find that this little “V” or delta of skin gives a more natural appearance than a completely smooth circumcision.

Was it a mistake?

No, it is almost always intentional.

Surgeons who use this style (especially in Europe and Canada) do it on purpose and sometimes refer to it as:

• “Partial frenulum-sparing circumcision”
• “High circumcision with preservation of the frenular delta”
• “Frenular wing technique”

Long-term patient feedback (medical forums + studies)

• 85–90 % of men who have this small tag find it more pleasurable than if nothing had been left.
• Regrets are extremely rare; on the contrary, some men who had a completely “clean” circumcision regret not having this little piece preserved.

Conclusion

Your surgeon did not make a mistake; he very probably used a modern technique whose goal is to keep as much pleasure as possible while still giving you a tight circumcision.

It’s exactly what many men ask for when they want a circumcision that is both functional/aesthetic and preserves maximum sensitivity. If one day you ever want it removed (purely for cosmetic reasons), it’s a 10-minute touch-up under local anaesthetic, but the vast majority of patients keep it and really appreciate it. You actually got a rather “premium” circumcision in terms of sensitivity!