• Military medicine · Aug 2022

    A Novel Technique Using Ultrasonic Shears Versus Traditional Methods of Reduction of Bilateral Labia Minora Hypertrophy: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

    • Thuan H Le, Ernest G Lockrow, and Scott P Endicott.
    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD 20889, USA.
    • Mil Med. 2022 Aug 25; 187 (9-10): e1122e1126e1122-e1126.

    IntroductionTo compare the clinical outcomes of bilateral labia minora hypertrophy reduction using ultrasonic shears versus traditional methods.Materials And MethodsIn this retrospective study, we evaluate the surgical outcomes of 11 women who underwent bilateral labia minora hypertrophy reduction using ultrasonic shears to 14 women who underwent the same procedure using various traditional methods between January 1, 2015 and February 29, 2020 in a single center. The primary outcomes evaluated are total operative time, estimated blood loss, and postoperative pain. Secondary outcomes include postoperative complications and total admission time. The statistical analyses used were exact Wilconxon Rank and Fisher's exact test.Results25 total bilateral labiaplasty procedures were included in the analysis. 11 procedures were performed using ultrasonic shears and 14 were performed using traditional methods. The mean reduction operative time for the ultrasonic shears technique when compared with traditional methods was 43.25 minutes (22.82 minutes versus 66.07 minutes, P = .0002). A statistically significant but non-clinically significant difference in estimated blood loss was noted. No statistically significant differences existed with postoperative pain score, total admission time, or postoperative complications.ConclusionsUltrasonic shears significantly reduce the time needed for the reduction of bilateral labia minora hypertrophy and therefore should be considered by surgeons as a useful tool in increasing the efficiency of this procedure.Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Association of Military Surgeons of the United States 2022. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.