Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 318

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Outcome of Vaginoplasty in Male-to-Female Transgenders: A Systematic Review of Surgical Techniques

Open access
Horbach, Sophie E.R., Bouman, Mark-Bram, Smit, Jan Maerten, Özer, Müjde, Buncamper, Marlon E., Mullender, Margriet G.·2015·The Journal of Sexual Medicine

Abstract

Introduction: Gender reassignment surgery is the keystone of the treatment of transgender patients. For male-to-female transgenders, this involves the creation of a neovagina. Many surgical methods for vaginoplasty have been opted. The penile skin inversion technique is the method of choice for most gender surgeons. However, the optimal surgical technique for vaginoplasty in transgender women has not yet been identified, as outcomes of the different techniques have never been compared. Aim: With this systematic review, we aim to give a detailed overview of the published outcomes of all currently available techniques for vaginoplasty in male-to-female transgenders. Methods: A PubMed and EMBASE search for relevant publications (1995–present), which provided data on the outcome of techniques for vaginoplasty in male-to-female transgender patients. Main Outcome Measures: Main outcome measures are complications, neovaginal depth and width, sexual function, patient satisfaction, and improvement in quality of life (QoL). Results: Twenty-six studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The majority of these studies were retrospective case series of low to intermediate quality. Outcome of the penile skin inversion technique was reported in 1,461 patients, bowel vaginoplasty in 102 patients. Neovaginal stenosis was the most frequent complication in both techniques. Sexual function and patient satisfaction were overall acceptable, but many different outcome measures were used. QoL was only reported in one study. Comparison between techniques was difficult due to the lack of standardization. Conclusions: The penile skin inversion technique is the most researched surgical procedure. Outcome of bowel vaginoplasty has been reported less frequently but does not seem to be inferior. The available literature is heterogeneous in patient groups, surgical procedure, outcome measurement tools, and follow-up. Standardized protocols and prospective study designs are mandatory for correct interpretation and comparability of data.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jsm.12868

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 318

Metadata

Authors
Horbach, S. E. R., Bouman, M.-B., Smit, J. M., Özer, M., Buncamper, M. E., & Mullender, M. G.
Venue
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Published
2015-06-01
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
1499-1512
ISSN
  • 1743-6095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-6109
OpenAlex
W1900583916
Cited by
318
References
30
FWCI
4.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Outcome of Vaginoplasty in Male-to-Female Transgenders: A Systematic Review of Surgical Techniques. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/jsm.12868
The paper
Horbach, S. E. R., Bouman, M.-B., Smit, J. M., Özer, M., Buncamper, M. E., & Mullender, M. G. (2015). Outcome of Vaginoplasty in Male-to-Female Transgenders: A Systematic Review of Surgical Techniques. The Journal of Sexual Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12868

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.