SURGICAL VS. NON-SURGICAL APPROACHES IN VAGINAL AGENESIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Universitas Airlangga Surabaya
Universitas Airlangga Surabaya
Universitas Airlangga Surabaya
RSUD Dr. Soetomo
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56943/jsh.v3i4.626Introduction. Vaginal agenesis is the rudimentary or complete absence of vagina. The treatment of vaginal agenesis consists of various surgical and non-surgical techniques. This systematic review aims to describe the differences between surgical and non-surgical techniques of vaginal agenesis treatment in terms of vaginal length and sexual function. Method. Electronic databases such as PubMed, Science Direct, and SCOPUS were searched for articles published between 2018-2023. Literature restricted for women with vaginal agenesis who underwent surgical or non-surgical techniques was reviewed. Cross-sectional studies, observational studies, cohort studies, and retrospective studies were included in this study. Out of 190 articles, 8 articles were analyzed. All studies that reported total vaginal length and sexual function after treatment were conducted. Result & Analysis. The mean total vaginal length in the non-surgical technique was 7.23 cm and 8.88 cm in the surgical technique. Meanwhile, the level of sexual function, as measured using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) score, showed a result of 24.40 in non- surgical techniques and 25.23 in surgical techniques. There is also one article with surgical techniques that assesses the level of sexual function objectively, resulting in sexual function within normal limits. Discussion. Total vaginal length in both techniques was normal but not on the FSFI scores. However, surgical techniques showed a slightly higher outcome Even so, non-surgical techniques are also a good treatment option considering the outcome are not much different compared to surgical techniques.
Keywords: MRKH Non-Surgical Surgical Vaginal Agenesis
Abrar, S., Rizvi, R. and Muhammad Zia-Ul-Islam (2022) ‘Vaginal Reconstruction in Patients with vaginal agenesis: Options and Outcome: A single-center experience’, Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 39(1 SE-Original Articles). Available at: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.39.1.6356.
Anagani, M. et al. (2020) ‘Novel Minimally Invasive Technique of Neovaginoplasty Using an Absorbable Adhesion Barrier’, Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 27(1), pp. 206–211. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2019.02.025.
Cheikhelard, A. et al. (2018) ‘Surgery is not superior to dilation for the management of vaginal agenesis in Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome: a multicenter comparative observational study in 131 patients’, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 219(3), pp. 281.e1-281.e9. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.07.015.
Ediati, A. (2016) ‘Dampak Psikologis dan Kualitas Hidup pada Perempuan dengan Sindrom Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser (MRKH)’, in Proceeding Seminar Nasional Psikologi Positif 2016. Surabaya, pp. 231–240. Available at: http://eprints.undip.ac.id/63860/.
Fernandes, M.S. et al. (2022) ‘Three-dimensional Printer Molds for Vaginal Agenesis: An Individualized Approach as Conservative Treatment’, Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia / RBGO Gynecology and Obstetrics, 44(12), pp. 1110–1116. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1756214.
Fontoura Oliveira, A. and Ferreira, H. (2021) ‘Neovagina creation in congenital vaginal agenesis: New mini-laparoscopic approach applying intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence’, Surgical Innovation, 28(1), pp. 24–32. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350620968990.
Herlin, M. et al. (2018) ‘Treatment of vaginal agenesis in Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome in Denmark: a nationwide comparative study of anatomical outcome and complications’, Fertility and Sterility, 110(4), pp. 746–753. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.05.015.
Kang, J. et al. (2020) ‘Sexual function and quality of life after the creation of a neovagina in women with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome: comparison of vaginal dilation and surgical procedures’, Fertility and Sterility, 113(5), pp. 1024–1031. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.01.017.
Kurniawati, E.M. (2019) ‘Vaginal Approach for Mullerian Anomaly’, in Proceeding Book Pertemuan Ilmiah Tahunan POGI Surabaya 2019 In Collaboration with AOFOG. Surabaya: CV. Saga Jawadwipa, pp. 276–285. Available at: https://repository.unair.ac.id/96356/.
