Labiaplasty of the Labia Minora: Patients’ Indications for Pursuing Surgery

Authors


John R. Miklos, MD, Atlanta Urogynecology Associates, 3400-C Old Milton Pkwy Suite 330, Alpharetta 30005, GA, USA. Tel: 770-475-4499; Fax: 770-475-0875; E-mail: johnRmiklos@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

Introduction.  Limited information is available regarding patients’ indication for seeking labiaplasty of the labia minora.

Aim.  The aim of this article is to investigate a patient's indications for seeking labiaplasty of the labia minora.

Methods.  This is a retrospective review of the medical records of all patients undergoing labiaplasty at our clinic over a 27-month period.

Main Outcome Measures.  Indications for surgery were assessed using standardized questionnaires during the patients’ initial history and physical. Patients were divided into three groups as based on the questionnaire, including: Group I—patients seeking the procedure strictly for aesthetic reasons; Group II—patients seeking the procedure strictly for functional impairment (i.e., pain and discomfort); and Group III—patients who feel they are having the surgery for both aesthetic and functional reasons. Patients undergoing the surgery for aesthetic reasons were also asked whether this was strictly a personal decision or was influenced by either another man or woman whether a friend, spouse, or partner.

Results.  The review revealed 131 patients had undergone a labia reduction surgery: Group I—those who received labia reduction surgery for strictly aesthetic reasons equaled 37% (49/131); Group II—those seeking the surgery strictly for functional impairment equaled 32% (42/131); and Group III—those seeking the surgery for both functional and aesthetic reasons equaled 31% (40/131).

Conclusion.  The majority of patients undergoing reduction of the labia minora do so for functional reasons with minimal outside influences affecting their decision for treatment. Miklos JR, and Moore RD. Labiaplasty of the labia minora: Patients's indications for pursuing surgery. J Sex Med 2008;5:1492–1495.

Ancillary