JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW

Selecting aesthetic gynecologic procedures for plastic surgeons: a review of target methodology

Adam Ostrzenski
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2013, 37 (2): 256-65
23381650

BACKGROUND: The objective of this article was to assist cosmetic-plastic surgeons in selecting aesthetic cosmetic gynecologic-plastic surgical interventions.

METHODS: Target methodological analyses of pertinent evidence-based scientific papers and anecdotal information linked to surgical techniques for cosmetic-plastic female external genitalia were examined. A search of the existing literature from 1900 through June 2011 was performed by utilizing electronic and manual databases.

RESULTS: A total of 87 articles related to cosmetic-plastic gynecologic surgeries were identified in peer-review journals. Anecdotal information was identified in three sources (Barwijuk, Obstet Gynecol J 9(3):2178-2179, 2011; Benson, 5th annual congress on aesthetic vaginal surgery, Tucson, AZ, USA, November 14-15, 2010; Scheinberg, Obstet Gynecol J 9(3):2191, 2011). Among those articles on cosmetic-plastic gynecologic surgical technique that were reviewed, three articles met the criteria for evidence-based medicine level II, one article was level II-1 and two papers were level II-2. The remaining papers were classified as level III. The pertinent 25 papers met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. There was no documentation on the safety and effectiveness of cosmetic-plastic gynecologic procedures in the scientific literature.

CONCLUSIONS: All published surgical interventions are not suitable for a cosmetic-plastic practice. The absence of documentation on safety and effectiveness related to cosmetic-plastic gynecologic procedures prevents the establishment of a standard of practice. Traditional gynecologic surgical procedures cannot be labeled and used as cosmetic-plastic procedures, it is a deceptive practice. Obtaining legal trademarks on traditional gynecologic procedures and creating a business model that tries to control clinical-scientific knowledge dissemination is unethical.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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 the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
23381650
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"

We want to hear from doctors like you!

Take a second to answer a survey question.