B S Verkauf1, J Von Thron, W F O'Brien. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of South Florida, College of Medicine, Tampa.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine clitoral size in normal women and the possible effect of age, height, weight, parity, and oral contraceptive (OC) use. METHODS: Prospective measurement was made of clitoral dimensions in 200 consecutive normal women at routine gynecologic examination in an office setting. RESULTS: The mean (+/- standard deviation) transverse diameter of the glans clitoris was 3.4 +/- 1.0 mm. The longitudinal diameter of the glans was 5.1 +/- 1.4 mm. Total clitoral length including glans and body was 16.0 +/- 4.3 mm. The mean clitoral index was 18.5 mm2. Measurements of all diameters were normally distributed. Age, height, weight, or current use of OCs did not influence clitoral size, but parous women had significantly larger measurements. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to obtain useful clitoral measurements in the office setting. Parity influences clitoral size, but age, height, weight, and OC use do not.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine clitoral size in normal women and the possible effect of age, height, weight, parity, and oral contraceptive (OC) use. METHODS: Prospective measurement was made of clitoral dimensions in 200 consecutive normal women at routine gynecologic examination in an office setting. RESULTS: The mean (+/- standard deviation) transverse diameter of the glans clitoris was 3.4 +/- 1.0 mm. The longitudinal diameter of the glans was 5.1 +/- 1.4 mm. Total clitoral length including glans and body was 16.0 +/- 4.3 mm. The mean clitoral index was 18.5 mm2. Measurements of all diameters were normally distributed. Age, height, weight, or current use of OCs did not influence clitoral size, but parous women had significantly larger measurements. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to obtain useful clitoral measurements in the office setting. Parity influences clitoral size, but age, height, weight, and OC use do not.
Authors: Raoul C M Hennekam; Judith E Allanson; Leslie G Biesecker; John C Carey; John M Opitz; Eric Vilain Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Shaniel T Bowen; Arijit Dutta; Krystyna Rytel; Steven D Abramowitch; Rebecca G Rogers; Pamela A Moalli Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2022-04-08 Impact factor: 1.932
Authors: Beatriz Goldschmidt; Pedro H Cabello; Tatiana Kugelmeier; Barbara B Pereira; Claudia A Lopes; Daniele M Fasano; Marcia C Andrade; Joice S Santos; Antonio M Marinho Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 1.232