Advertisement
Guest Editorial| Volume 71, ISSUE 4, P313-314, April 2012

Giving female genital cosmetic surgery a facelift

  • Alexandra M. McPencow
    Affiliations
    Section of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Marsha K. Guess
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, PO Box 208063 New Haven, CT 06520-8063, USA. Tel.: +1 203 737 4880: fax: +1 203 785 2909..
    Affiliations
    Section of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
    Search for articles by this author
      The “designer vagina” sounds like the name of a “Sex in the City” episode, and may evoke a variety of responses, from enthusiasm for anything that can make the vagina more modern and user-friendly, to mistrust for unproven treatments for conditions that have not been clearly defined. Regardless of one's response, the definition of the “designer vagina” is elusive and must be comprehensible before any discussion can ensue. In a committee opinion in 2007, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [
      Committee on Gynecologic Practice American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
      ACOG committee opinion No. 378: vaginal “rejuvenation” and cosmetic vaginal procedures.
      ], stated that terms such as “designer vaginoplasty” or “vaginal rejuvenation” are not standard medical nomenclature. As such, procedures using these non-specific definitions cannot be appropriately studied for safety and efficacy. Four years later, Mirzabeigi et al., proposed, in a letter to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery in 2011[
      • Mirzabeigi M.N.
      • Jandali S.
      • Mettel R.
      • Alter G.
      The nomenclature of “vaginal rejuvenation” and elective vulvovaginal plastic surgery.
      ], that terminology be standardized in an effort to avoid ambiguity and inconsistency. In this editorial, we refer to techniques employed to modify the physical appearance (shape, caliber or length) of the vagina and external genitalia for aesthetic purposes as “female genital cosmetic surgery” (FGCS) [
      • Goodman M.
      Female cosmetic genital surgery.
      ].

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Maturitas
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Committee on Gynecologic Practice American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
        ACOG committee opinion No. 378: vaginal “rejuvenation” and cosmetic vaginal procedures.
        Obset Gynecol. 2007; 110: 737-738
        • Mirzabeigi M.N.
        • Jandali S.
        • Mettel R.
        • Alter G.
        The nomenclature of “vaginal rejuvenation” and elective vulvovaginal plastic surgery.
        Aesthetic Surg J. 2011; 31: 723-724
        • Goodman M.
        Female cosmetic genital surgery.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 113: 154-159
        • Goodman M.
        Female genital cosmetic and plastic surgery: a review.
        J Sex Med. 2011; 8: 1813-1825
        • Braun V.
        Female genital cosmetic surgery: a critical review of current knowledge and contemporary debates.
        J Womens Health. 2010; 19: 1393-1407