INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The study's objectives were to determine changes in vaginal length and caliber after vaginal surgery and to correlate changes with sexual function. METHODS: This prospective study measured vaginal length and caliber before and immediately after vaginal surgery and at 5- to 8-week follow-up. A sexual function questionnaire was administered preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Ninety-two women were enrolled (mean age, 64 years); 44 (47.8%) were sexually active. The most common procedure was Mayo-McCall culdoplasty in 85 women (92.4%). Fourteen (15.2%) had intentional vaginal shortening and narrowing (coning). Mean vaginal length changed from 10.4 cm preoperatively to 8.7 cm at 5- to 8-week follow-up in women not having coning. Mean vaginal caliber changed from 3.2 to 2.8 cm. Preoperative and postoperative sexual function questionnaire scores did not correlate with vaginal measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal shortening and narrowing occurred after vaginal surgery; sexual function was unchanged.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The study's objectives were to determine changes in vaginal length and caliber after vaginal surgery and to correlate changes with sexual function. METHODS: This prospective study measured vaginal length and caliber before and immediately after vaginal surgery and at 5- to 8-week follow-up. A sexual function questionnaire was administered preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Ninety-two women were enrolled (mean age, 64 years); 44 (47.8%) were sexually active. The most common procedure was Mayo-McCall culdoplasty in 85 women (92.4%). Fourteen (15.2%) had intentional vaginal shortening and narrowing (coning). Mean vaginal length changed from 10.4 cm preoperatively to 8.7 cm at 5- to 8-week follow-up in women not having coning. Mean vaginal caliber changed from 3.2 to 2.8 cm. Preoperative and postoperative sexual function questionnaire scores did not correlate with vaginal measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal shortening and narrowing occurred after vaginal surgery; sexual function was unchanged.
Authors: R Basson; J Berman; A Burnett; L Derogatis; D Ferguson; J Fourcroy; I Goldstein; A Graziottin; J Heiman; E Laan; S Leiblum; H Padma-Nathan; R Rosen; K Segraves; R T Segraves; R Shabsigh; M Sipski; G Wagner; B Whipple Journal: J Urol Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Megan O Schimpf; Heidi S Harvie; Tola B Omotosho; Lee B Epstein; Marjorie Jean-Michel; Cedric K Olivera; Kristin E Rooney; Sunil Balgobin; Okechukwu A Ibeanu; Rajiv B Gala; Rebecca G Rogers Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2009-12-04 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Rachel N Pauls; W Andre Silva; Christopher M Rooney; Sam Siddighi; Steven D Kleeman; Vicki Dryfhout; Mickey M Karram Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Stacy Tessler Lindau; Emily M Abramsohn; Shirley R Baron; Judith Florendo; Hope K Haefner; Anuja Jhingran; Vanessa Kennedy; Mukta K Krane; David M Kushner; Jennifer McComb; Diane F Merritt; Julie E Park; Amy Siston; Margaret Straub; Lauren Streicher Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Julia Geynisman-Tan; Kimberly Kenton; Alix Komar; Sarah Collins; Christina Lewicky-Gaupp; Margaret G Mueller Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2018-06-30 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Michael Krychman; Christopher G Rowan; Bruce B Allan; Scott Durbin; Ashley Yacoubian; Deborah Wilkerson Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Lauren N Siff; Matthew D Barber; Halina M Zyczynski; Charles R Rardin; Sharon Jakus-Waldman; David D Rahn; Ariana L Smith; Donna Mazloomdoost; Amaanti Sridhar; Marie G Gantz Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 7.623