Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23695382›Full record

ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2013

Female genital cosmetic surgery: a review of techniques and outcomes.

Cheryl B Iglesia, Ladin Yurteri-Kaplan, Red Alinsod

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International urogynecology journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 360 Genital Fat Transfer.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. The Safe Practice of Female Genital Plastic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Audit of Female Genital Aesthetic Surgery: Changing Trends in India.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2018
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Cheryl B IglesiaSection of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, USA, cheryl.iglesia@medstar.net.
Ladin Yurteri-Kaplan
Red Alinsod

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aesthetic and functional procedures that comprise female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS) include traditional vaginal prolapse procedures as well as cosmetic vulvar and labial procedures. The line between cosmetic and medically indicated surgical procedures is blurred, and today many operations are performed for both purposes. The contributions of gynecologists and reconstructive pelvic surgeons are crucial in this debate. Aesthetic vaginal surgeons may unintentionally blur legitimate female pelvic floor disorders with other aesthetic conditions. In the absence of quality outcome data, the value of FGCS in improving sexual function remains uncertain. Women seeking FGCS need to be educated about the range and variation of labia widths and genital appearance, and should be evaluated for true pelvic support disorders such as pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. Women seeking FGCS should also be screened for psychological conditions and should act autonomously without coercion from partners or surgeons with proprietary conflicts of interest.

Indexed as

Cosmetic TechniquesBody ImageFemaleHumansPerineumPostoperative ComplicationsRejuvenationSexualityVaginaVulva

Identifiers

PMID23695382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.