Incidence of Obstetric Lacerations and Episiotomy Following Labiaplasty

Did She or Didn't She? Perceptions of Operative Status of Female Genitalia

BACKGROUND

Although extensive research has explored why women undergo labiaplasty, little attention has been paid to societal and professional abilities to distinguish between altered and unaltered labia, impacting both patient concerns and broader societal perceptions.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the general public and healthcare professionals in identifying labiaplasty and to pinpoint the misconceptions driving their perceptions. The goal was to inform more effective patient counseling strategies and challenge existing stigmas around cosmetic genital surgery.

METHODS

The authors conducted an online survey of 511 lay adults and a group of 21 gynecologists and aesthetic vulvar surgeons. The survey assessed the participants' ability to detect labiaplasty from images, focusing on aesthetic appearance, hair patterns, and size. The analysis involved Pearson correlation and Z-tests to compare perceptions against actual operative status.

RESULTS

Analysis of the survey findings revealed a pronounced difficulty among participants in accurately discerning labiaplasty, with neither group showing a significant ability to identify surgical alterations. Misinterpretations were notably influenced by expectations of aesthetic appearance, with 49% associating an "odd" or "fake" look with surgery, and hair and size misconceptions also misleading respondents. Additionally, 20% of participants mistakenly related surgical changes to gender-affirming surgery or female genital mutilation.

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights a gap in the ability of both the general public and medical professionals to accurately identify labiaplasty, pointing to a broad misunderstanding of cosmetic genital surgery's visual outcomes. Addressing these misconceptions through targeted education could substantially improve patient counseling and help dismantle the stigmas associated with labiaplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Labiaplasty: The Stigma Persists

BACKGROUND

Heightening interest in labiaplasty has driven potential patients to online fora, permitting the dissemination of material by potentially unqualified or inexperienced individuals. The discourse surrounding this procedure has been injected with strong opinions that are not entirely consistent with medical best-practice or evidence-based knowledge.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore the rationale for ongoing public opposition to labiaplasty and to investigate if awareness of the similarities between labiaplasty and breast reduction can alter an individual's perception.

METHODS

Four hundred and forty-eight adult women were surveyed concerning their opinion of a surgical procedure to reduce the size of an unspecified organ related to a woman's sexuality, breast reduction, and labia reduction.

RESULTS

Reduction of an unspecified organ and breasts was met with significantly greater acceptance than labia reduction (P < 0.0001). Presenting responders with an educational tool comparing each procedure's indications, risks, and potential benefits did not alter respondent opinions, indicating notions about sexual surgery are relatively fixed. The most common reason respondents persisted in their relative opposition to labia reduction was a perceived deficiency in social acceptance (27.1%), followed by a perceived similarity to female genital mutilation (14.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Attitudes towards labiaplasty seem firmly based on emotion or correlation to other unacceptable practices. Informational resources do not sway these biases; thus, there is a limited role for surgeon-led education in the normalization of labiaplasty because it requires a societal shift in acceptance. Labiaplasty is a procedure whose time for popular acceptance has not yet come.

A New Modified Labiaplasty Combined with Wedge De-Epithelialization on the Medial Side and Edge Resection

BACKGROUND

Labiaplasty (labia minora reduction) has been increasingly requested in recent years. The surgical procedures previously reported in the literature may have some complications that affect patient satisfaction.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a new bilateral labiaplasty procedure that combined wedge de-epithelialization on the medial side with edge resection on the lateral side were retrospectively reviewed. Satisfaction rates were assessed, and questionnaires, namely the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and Genital Appearance Satisfaction (GAS) scale, were distributed and analyzed. The data from the study group were compared with data from cases who underwent traditional labiaplasty with wedge resection (control group).

RESULTS

From October 2015 to February 2020, fifty-one women underwent modified labiaplasty, while 26 women underwent traditional labiaplasty. A total of 94.1% (48/51) of patients in the modified group were satisfied with the genital appearance. Compared with the 96.2% (25/26) satisfaction rate in the control group, the difference was not statistically significant. A total of 43/55 valid questionnaires were returned, including 29 in the modified labiaplasty group and 14 in the control group. There was a significant improvement in the postoperative GAS scale compared to the preoperative scale in both groups (P<0.05). The new modified method had a significant FSFI improvement after the operation compared with preoperative scores (P<0.05), while the FSFI improvement was not significant in the control group (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the FSFI score improvement, postoperative GAS score or postoperative FSFI between the two groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

This new modified labiaplasty is a satisfying and safe method with low risks, and it may result in better sexual sensitivity for the patients LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine Ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .