Re: Vaginal 'Rejuvenation' and Cosmetic Vaginal Procedures
From: Efrain Ramirez (eramirezt@coqui.net)
Tue Sep 4 19:44:50 2007
Vaginal "Rejuvenation" and Cosmetic Vaginal Procedures. ACOG Committee
Opinion No. 378. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:737–8.
The American College
of Obstetricians
and Gynecologists
Women's Health Care
Physicians
Number 378 • September 2007
Ef
At Tue, 4 Sep 2007, Lynn Montgomery wrote:
>
>Efrain,
>I may have missed it, but where is this reference from?
>Thanks,
>Lynn
>
>--
>Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.
>Obstetrics & Gynecology, Maternal-Fetal Medicine
>The Birth Center/Rocky Mountain Women's Health
>1211 S. Reserve St.
>Missoula, Montana, 59801
>406-549-0978
>fax 406-549-0987
>e-mail: apgar10@thebirthcentermt.com
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Efrain
>Ramirez
>Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:22 PM
>To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
>Subject: Vaginal 'Rejuvenation' and Cosmetic Vaginal Procedures
>
>Vaginal "Rejuvenation" and Cosmetic Vaginal Procedures
>
>ABSTRACT: So-called "vaginal rejuvenation," "designer vaginoplasty,"
>"revirgination," and "G-spot amplification" are vaginal surgical
>procedures being offered by some practitioners. These procedures are
>not medically indicated, and the safety and effectiveness of these
>procedures have not been documented. Clinicians who receive requests
>from patients for such procedures should discuss with the patient the
>reason for her request and perform an evaluation for any physical signs
>or symptoms that may indicate the need for surgical intervention. Women
>should be informed about the lack of data supporting the efficacy of
>these procedures and their potential complications, including infection,
>altered sensation, dyspareunia, adhesions, and scarring.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>There have been an increasing number of practitioners offering various
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>types of vaginal surgeries marketed as ways to enhance appearance or
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>sexual gratification. Among the types of procedures being promoted are
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>so-called "vaginal rejuvenation," "designer vaginoplasty,"
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"revirgination," and "G-spot amplification." Often the exact procedure
>performed is not clear because standard medical nomenclature is not
>used. Some procedures, such as vaginal rejuvenation, appear to be
>modifications of traditional vaginal surgical procedures. Other
>procedures are performed to alter the size or shape of the labia majora
>or labia minora. Revirgination involves hymenal repair in an attempt to
>approximate the virginal state. G-spot amplification involves the
>injection of collagen into the anterior wall of the vagina.
>Medically indicated surgical procedures may include reversal or repair
>of female genital cutting and treatment for labial hypertrophy or
>asymmetrical labial growth secondary to congenital conditions, chronic
>irritation, or excessive androgenic hormones. Other procedures,
>including vaginal rejuvenation, designer vaginoplasty, revirgination,
>and G-spot amplification, are not medically indicated, and the safety
>and effectiveness of these procedures have not been documented. No
>adequate studies have been published assessing the long-term
>satisfaction, safety, and complication rates for these procedures.
>
>Also of concern are ethical issues associated with the marketing of
>these procedures and the national franchising in this field. Such a
>business model that controls the dissemination of scientific knowledge
>is troubling.
>
>Clinicians who receive requests from patients for such procedures should
>discuss with the patient the reason for her request and perform an
>evaluation for any physical signs or symptoms that may indicate the need
>for surgical intervention. A patient's concern regarding the appearance
>of her genitalia may be alleviated by a frank discussion of the wide
>range of normal genitalia and reassurance that the appearance of the
>external genitalia varies significantly from woman to woman (1).
>Concerns regarding sexual gratification may be addressed by careful
>evaluation for any sexual dysfunction and an exploration of nonsurgical
>interventions, including counseling.
>
>It is deceptive to give the impression that vaginal rejuvenation,
>designer vaginoplasty, revirgination, G-spot amplification, or any such
>procedures are accepted and routine surgical practices. Absence of data
>supporting the safety and efficacy of these procedures makes their
>recommendation untenable. Patients who are anxious or insecure about
>their genital appearance or sexual function may be further traumatized
>by undergoing an unproven surgical procedure with obvious risks. Women
>should be informed about the lack of data supporting the efficacy of
>these procedures and their potential complications, including infection,
>altered sensation, dyspareunia, adhesions, and scarring.
>
>Reference
>
>1. Lloyd J, Crouch NS, Minto CL, Liao LM, Creighton SM. Female genital
>appearance: "normality" unfolds. BJOG 2005;112:643-6.
>
>--
>" The greatest obstacle to knowledge is not ignorance,
>it is the illusion of knowledge." Daniel J. Boorstin - Historian
>
--
“ The greatest obstacle to knowledge is not ignorance,
it is the illusion of knowledge.” Daniel J. Boorstin - Historian
