Cosmetic gynecology—a systematic review and call for standardized outcome measures

• Published in: International Urogynecology Journal Vol. 31; no. 10; pp. 1979 - 1995
• Main Authors: Garcia, Bobby, Scheib, Stacey, Hallner, Barry, Thompson, Nia, Schiavo, Julie, Peacock, Lisa
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 01-10-2020; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Cosmetic surgery; Gynecological surgery; Gynecology; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Review Article; Systematic review; Urology; Vagina; Labiaplasty; Labia majora augmentation; Vaginal laxity; Vaginoplasty; Cosmetic gynecology
• ISSN: 0937-3462; 1433-3023
• DOI: 10.1007/s00192-020-04294-5

Objective
Cosmetic gynecology, a field which has garnered substantial attention over recent years, lacks a universally accepted nomenclature. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate techniques, outcome measures reported, and adverse events in patients undergoing cosmetic gynecology procedures and offer recommendations to improve reporting metrics.
Methods
A systematic literature search was performed using electronic databases from inception to April 2019. The search was based on 51 unique cosmetic gynecology keywords such as: “labiaplasty,” “vaginal rejuvenation,” and “liposuction mons pubis.” All English full-text prospective and retrospective observational and interventional studies with at least five subjects that describe a cosmetic gynecology procedure were included. Only full-text articles were included. This protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42019131860).
Results
A total of 1837 articles were identified from the search strategy with 42 included in the quantitative synthesis. Procedures described included: labia minora reduction with or without clitoral hood reduction, labia majora augmentation, surgical vaginal caliber reduction, mons pubis reduction/suspension, and energy-based therapy for vaginal laxity or vulvar laxity. Efficacy and satisfaction metrics were highly variable ranging from validated questionnaires to no outcome subjectively or objectively quantified. Complication rates varied by procedure but were generally low and ranged between Clavien-Dindo grades I–III.
Conclusions
Although there is a breadth of literature on cosmetic gynecology surgical techniques and short-term complication rates, the terminology and outcome measures utilized are heterogeneous. To address this, standardized terminology along with uniform cosmetic and functional endpoints must be developed.