COMMENTARY

Aesthetic Vaginal Surgery Today: A Collegial Rebuttal to Drs. Iglesia and Walden

Red M. Alinsod, MD

Disclosures

August 07, 2013

In This Article

Conclusions

More than 5 years since the ACOG Committee's report on AVS was published, controversy persists over the necessity, benefits, and safety of AVS, as well as the ethics of personal choice in elective AVS.[1] This controversy will not be resolved overnight, but joint discussion across medical specializations will help to advance the field for the benefit of patients.

AVS has reached a level of maturity that fosters the cross-fertilization of ideas and the exchange of surgical techniques. The time is right for clinicians in a broad range of surgical specializations, gynecologic aesthetic surgeons, gynecologic plastic surgeons, cosmetic surgeons, general surgeons, urogynecologists, urologists, and general practice physicians, to join forces. AVS is emerging as an ethical and evidence-based approach to treating functional and cosmetic vaginal conditions using integrated restorative and aesthetic surgical techniques.

Expert opinion in AVS ultimately must be based on expert training and extensive surgical experience. This experience shapes, and is shaped by, cumulative clinical data methodically collected by highly trained experts committed to patient-centered care and quality in healthcare.

Comments

3090D553-9492-4563-8681-AD288FA52ACE
Comments on Medscape are moderated and should be professional in tone and on topic. You must declare any conflicts of interest related to your comments and responses. Please see our Commenting Guide for further information. We reserve the right to remove posts at our sole discretion.

processing....