Scholarlink

<p>In recent years, demand for aesthetic and functional procedures involving the female genitalia has increased significantly. Factors such as pubic hair removal, easy access to online pornography, internet research, and societal beauty standards contribute to heightened awareness of perceived deviations from a&#xa0;“normal” appearance. Office-based gynecologists increasingly face the challenge of balancing subjective distress, medical indication, and legal and ethical responsibilities. This article discusses the drivers behind this trend and reviews current legal frameworks, national and international guidelines, and evidence-based position statements (ACOG, OEGGG, FDA, AWMF). A&#xa0;clear distinction is made between medically indicated reconstructive procedures and purely aesthetic interventions. Current evidence does not support the efficacy or safety of many energy-based or laser treatments. Psychosocial factors, contraindications, and the importance of thorough patient counseling and documentation are emphasized. Finally, strategies to improve patient safety, including national quality registries and public education, are proposed.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Gynäkologische Diagnosen zwischen medizinischer Indikation und Wunsch nach Selbstoptimierung

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月26日

查看全文
  • Petra Kohlberger

摘要

In recent years, demand for aesthetic and functional procedures involving the female genitalia has increased significantly. Factors such as pubic hair removal, easy access to online pornography, internet research, and societal beauty standards contribute to heightened awareness of perceived deviations from a “normal” appearance. Office-based gynecologists increasingly face the challenge of balancing subjective distress, medical indication, and legal and ethical responsibilities. This article discusses the drivers behind this trend and reviews current legal frameworks, national and international guidelines, and evidence-based position statements (ACOG, OEGGG, FDA, AWMF). A clear distinction is made between medically indicated reconstructive procedures and purely aesthetic interventions. Current evidence does not support the efficacy or safety of many energy-based or laser treatments. Psychosocial factors, contraindications, and the importance of thorough patient counseling and documentation are emphasized. Finally, strategies to improve patient safety, including national quality registries and public education, are proposed.