Statement of the British Association of Paediatric Surgeons Working Party on the Surgical Management of

Children Born with Ambiguous Genitalia

July 2001

 

Members of the Working Party

 

Mr Laurence Rangecroft           Paediatric Surgery/Urology       Newcastle upon Tyne

Dr Caroline Brain                     Paediatric Endocrinology          London           

Miss Sarah Creighton               Gynaecology                            London

Dr Domenico Di Ceglie             Psychiatry                                 London           

Dr Amanda Ogilvy-Stuart         Neonatal Paediatrics                 Cambridge

Mr Patrick Malone                   Paediatric Urology                    Southampton   

Mr Richard Turnock                 Paediatric Surgery                    Liverpool

 

Written submissions were taken from:

The Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome Support Group (UK)

The Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia Network

            Dr Gerard Conway       Consultant Endocrinologist, London

            Catherine Minto            Research Fellow, UCLH, London

 


Introduction

 

The surgery of intersex conditions in childhood is complex and demanding such that comprehensive coverage might require a document of textbook length.  It is the hope of the working party however that this brief publication represents a fair and, above all, evidence based summation of current thinking and suggested practice.  Such is the pace of change that we may well need to review matters in a few years time but for now I would like to thank the other members for their considerable expertise and diligence over the last year.

 

(Laurence Rangecroft, Chairman, July 2001)


1. General Considerations

 

(a)    The surgical management of children born with ambiguous genitalia has always been difficult, subject to evolving attitudes and techniques, and at times controversial.  Standard protocols have stressed the need for early diagnosis, gender assignment and appropriate surgery in infancy.1 In recent years some authors, backed by patient support groups, have claimed that such surgery is damaging or mutilating and, as it is essentially cosmetic, should not be performed until the fully informed consent of the patient could be obtained, i.e. when the child becomes ‘Gillick Competent’.2,3,4  There are, however, so many specific issues related to the different diagnostic groups that such a policy would seem to be too prescriptive.

 

(b)   In view of the comparative rarity and complex issues involved in treating these children, we would unreservedly recommend their early referral to the nearest regional centre for both immediate and continuing management by a multidisciplinary team.  The disciplines involved should include appropriately trained paediatric surgeons and/or paediatric urologists, neonatologists and paediatric endocrinologists and their specialist nurses/support workers, geneticists, biochemists, psychologists and gynaecologists.   Psychological support for the child/adolescent and family should be well integrated with medical input, easily accessible at the time of need and provided by, or in consultation with, a specialised service.  These multidisciplinary teams and clinics are an obvious and important resource for training and research and, in particular, follow up studies.

(c)    While there is likely to be continuing pressure from parents for early corrective surgery, fully informed consent for such procedures would require them to be aware of the possibility of non-operative management with psychological support for the child and family.

 

2.      Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH)

 

(a)                CAH produces virilisation of the female fetus and forms the largest single diagnostic group of children presenting at birth with ambiguous genitalia in the United Kingdom. The degree of virilisation varies widely.

 

(b)               Although some of these girls may opt to change gender in later life, published reports to date suggest that the incidence is low and does not, of itself, constitute a strong indication for delaying feminising genitoplasty until adolescence or beyond.5,6      Rarely the diagnosis may be missed and a severely virilised 46 XX individual may be raised as a boy.  Assignment of gender has to be on an individual basis, and the decision may need to include cultural considerations.

 

(c)                The two essential elements of feminising genitoplasty are clitoral reduction/recession and vaginoplasty.  While the operation of clitoral shaft resection with preservation of the glans on its neurovascular bundles seems logical, and is probably an advance on total clitorectomy or clitoral recession, there is no evidence that the retained glans functions well in sexual/orgasmic terms.  Indeed there is some emerging evidence to the contrary ( see Appendix). Further revisional procedures in adolescence are common and may do further sensory damage.  Surgeons and parents need to be fully aware that this is the case before proceeding with this irreversible procedure and that there is a strong case for no clitoral surgery at all in lesser degrees of clitoromegaly.

 

(d)               The ease with which vaginoplasty can be performed at any age depends on the length of the common urogenital sinus.  The few long term follow up studies currently available suggest that the majority of girls will require some, and often major, revisional surgery for vaginal or introital stenosis in adolescence. 7, Appendix    Since early vaginoplasty confers no obvious benefit in a young girl, there would seem to be a strong case for delaying it until the onset of menstruation possibly makes it mandatory.  The advent of more recent techniques for coping with the high vagina, such as the Passerini-Glazel procedure 8,  would seem unlikely to alter the outcome as regards revisional surgery significantly.  Individual surgeons may feel that vaginoplasty is still warranted in the low, and therefore more straightforward cases, although again it confers no obvious benefit to the child or her parents.  The occasional patient with a urogenital sinus complicated by urinary stasis and/or infection may require an early surgical procedure.

 

3.      Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS)

 

(a)     These individuals have a 46 XY genotype, testes which are intra-abdominal or contained in inguinal herniae, and no internal female genitalia.  The phenotype, however is of a normal female although the vagina is invariably short and may be severely so.  Few will be diagnosed in the neonatal period, but some will present early with hernia and raise the issue of early gonadectomy.  All will be raised as girls and early gender assignment is not usually an issue.  Later hormonal virilisation is not, of course, possible.

 

(b)    Timing of gonadectomy

This remains controversial and adequate data on which to base recommendations are scarce. 9,10,11 The foremost concern is the potential for malignant change and the age when this may occur.  It has been argued that any such risk favours early gonadectomy but set against this is the possibility that bone maturation and body development in puberty may be better if mediated by the gradual and early emergence of endogenous sex steroids (aromatisation of testosterone to oestrodial occurs normally in CAIS) compared to the somewhat clumsy regimens of exogenous administration.  While one report has suggested an association between greater bone mineral density and late gonadectomy there is insufficient evidence to recommend it on that ground alone.12

 

In relation to malignant change a comprehensive review in 1987 quantified the risk at 2-5% in CAIS patients over 25 years of age, and the risk was deemed ‘small’ prior to that age. 13  In a study of 17 post-pubertal CAIS patients from Venezuela no malignant change was found. 14

There are three possible options:

1)      Early gonadectomy, particularly if they are contained in an inguinal hernia sac, or there are parental concerns over malignant change, or difficulty in accepting a female phenotype whilst testicular tissue is present.

2)      Late gonadectomy performed as soon as puberty has been completed.

3)      No gonadectomy in patients who are as well informed as possible of the potential malignancy risks.  Follow up of any such individuals would need to be assiduous and long term

 

It has been suggested that cryopreservation of gonadal tissue should be undertaken in those patients with AIS undergoing gonadectomy with a view to future fertility treatment.  Whilst the techniques of freezing testicular tissue and reusing it are now established, the ethical and moral issues surrounding these techniques are not clear even in the non-intersex group.  There is currently a multidisciplinary working party convened by the British Fertility Society looking at the issues surrounding cryopreservation and, until further information is available, this committee does not recommend cryopreservation on a routine basis.

 

(c)     Vaginal lengthening

Since there is no prospect of menstruation in these individuals, and orgasm should be possible in all,  ‘satisfactory’ intercourse in relation to penetration  is the only physical indication for trying to increase vaginal length.  Various methods of self dilation are available and seem the preferred option with reported success rates of 85-90%.15   The Vecchietti procedure 14  is favoured by some patients but unavailable in the UK, due to non-approval of the bougie device, and there is anecdotal evidence that the rapid (2-3 weeks) elongation produced by this manoeuvre leaves the vagina with insufficient support and can lead to prolapse.  If total vaginal replacement is required sigmoid colon or ileum are probably the best options but both skin or amnion grafts have their advocates.


4.        The severely undervirilised genetic male 

 

(a)  Conditions producing this state include partial androgen insensitivity syndrome, 5-a reductase deficiency, testicular regression syndrome and severe hypospadias.  Historically many of these genetically 46 XY individuals have either been raised as females or surgially assigned as such (including castration) because of what was deemed ‘surgically possible’.  Evidence for the effects of testosterone on the foetal brain, and subsequent post-pubertal gender identity in humans is somewhat equivocal.17  However studies from areas such as the Dominican Republic and Papua New Guinea on ‘untreated’ 5-a reductase patients have shown a strong tendency to virilise at puberty and almost 100% assumption of the male gender identity/role. 18 Furthermore, follow up studies by Reilly and Woodhouse on adult males with micropenis (defined as less than 2.5 SD below the mean stretched length for ages or stage of sexual development) have shown surprisingly good outcomes in terms of sexual function. 19

 

(b) Assignment of such individuals to the female gender by surgery should only be undertaken with considerable caution and following full multidisciplinary investigation and counselling of the parents.

 

5.      True Hermaphrodites/Mixed Gonadal Dysgenesis

Most of the issues in relation to these rare individuals have already been covered by the above but there is unequivocal evidence of a greater risk of malignant change in dysgenetic and streak gonads. 20,21  Streak gonads and any gonad inappropriate to the sex of rearing should, therefore, be removed and any retained testis should be placed in a palpable position for easier surveillance. 

References

 

1.      American Academy of Pediatrics.  Evaluation of the Newborn with Developmental Anomalies of the External Genitalia.  Pediatrics, vol 106:1, 2000, p 138-142

2.      Dreger, AD “Ambiguous Sex”…or Ambivalent Medicine?  Ethical Issues in the Medical Treatment of Intersexuality.  Hastings Center Report, vol 28, 1998, p 24-25.

3.      Kipnis, K., Diamond, M. Pediatric Ethics and the Surgical Assignment of Sex. Journal of Clinical Ethics, vol 9:4, 1998, p 398-410.

4.      BAPS Ethical Committee. Gender Assignment Surgery in Children. Ethical Position for Clinicians, 2000, www.baps.org.uk

5.      Ehrhardt,  AA, Meyer-Bahlburg,  HFL. Effects of prenatal sex hormones on  gender related behavior. Science, vol  211, 1981, p 1312-18.

6.      Mosley,  M, Bidder, R, Hughes, I.  Sex role behaviour and self-image in young patients with congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Br J Sexual Med  vol 16, 1989,

p 72-75

7.      Alizai, NK, Thomas, DFM, et al.  Feminising genitoplasty for congenital adrenal hyperplasia: What happens at puberty. J. Urol. Vol 161:5, 1999, p 1588-91.

8.      Passerini-Glazel,  G.  A new 1-stage procedure for clitovaginoplasty in severely masculinised female pseudohermaphrodites. J. Urol., vol 142, 1989, p 565.

9.      Viner, RM, Teoh, Y, Williams, DM, Patterson, MN, Hughes, IA. Androgen insensitivity syndrome: a survey of diagnostic procedures and management in the UK. Arch Dis Child, vol 77, 1997, p 305-309.

10.  Verp,  MS, Simpson,  JL. Abnormal sexual differentiation and neoplasia. Canc Genet Cytogenet, vol 25, 1987, p 191-218.

11.  Alvarez-Nava, F, Gonzalez, S, Soto, M, Martinez, C. Prieto, M. Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome: clinical and anatomopathological findings in 23 patients. Genet Counselling, vol 8, 1997, p 7-12.

12.  Soule, SG, Conway, G, et al. Osteopaenia as a feature of the androgen insensitivity syndrome. Clin Endocrin (Oxf), vol 43, 1995, p 671-5.

13.  Verp, MS, Simpson, JL. Op.cit.

14.  Alvarez-Nava, et al. Op.cit.

15.  Costa, EM, Mendonca, BB, et al.  Management of ambiguous genitalia in pseudohermaphrodites: new perspectives on vaginal dilation. Fertil Steril, vol 67(2), 1997, p 229-232.

16.  Barruto, F, et al. The Veccheitti procedure for surgical treatment of vaginal agenesis: comparison of laparoscopy and laparotomy. Int.J. of Gynecol. And Obst. vol 64:2, 1999, p 153-8.

17.  Meyer-Bahlburg, HFL. Commentary: Gender assignment and reassignment in 46,XY pseudohermaphroditism and related conditions. J.Clin.Endocrin. and Met, vol 84:10, 1999, p 3455-58.

18.  Imperato-McGinley, J, et al.  A cluster of male pseudohermaphrodites

with 5-a reductase deficiency in Papua New Guinea. Clin. Endocrinol, vol 34: 4, 1991, p 293-8.

19.  Reilly,  JM, Woodhouse, CRJ.  Small penis and male sexual role. J. Urol.,

vol 142, 1989, p 569-71.

20.  Manuel,  M, Katayama, KP, Jones, HW.  The age of occurrence of gonadal tumors in intersex patients with a Y chromosome. Am. J. Obst. Gynecol, vol 124, 1976, p 293-300.

21.  Savage, MO, Lowe, DG.  Gonadal neoplasia and abnormal sexual differentiation. Clin. Endocrinol. vol 32, 1990, p 519-33.

 

APPENDIX

CLITORAL SURGERY

 

Sarah Creighton Consultant Gynaecologist,

Catherine Minto Research Fellow

Department of Gynaecology, University College London Hospitals.

 

TYPES OF CLITORAL SURGERY

There are three main groups of plastic clitoral procedures:

 

1. Clitorectomy or Clitoral Amputation

This operation simply removes all that can be seen of the clitoris (ie all of the glans clitoris), and usually involves dissection and partial removal of the corpora. Often the prepuce and clitoral hood will also be removed or used for reconstruction elsewhere. It is believed this procedure is now rarely done in the UK although no data are available.

 

2. Clitoral Recession

In this procedure, none of the clitoral structures are removed, instead the clitoral structures are dissected out and then folded up and moved in their entirety, backwards under the symphysis pubis. As in the clitoral reduction procedure, the bilateral dorsal clitoral nerves maintain their connection to the clitoral glans. This procedure was found to cause pain on clitoral engorgement and again it is presumed this procedure is no longer performed.

 

3. Clitoral Reduction

In this procedure the glans clitoris is preserved, and the corpora are dissected and partially or totally removed. Most procedures today will identify the two dorsal clitoral nerves and maintain their connection to the clitoral glans. Sometimes the clitoral glans will be reduced in size by wedge excisions, either laterally, ventrally or dorsally.

 

AIMS AND BENEFITS OF SURGERY

Once a female sex of rearing has been determined, current practice is to perform appropriate surgery to ensure the genitalia are “normal”. The immediate aim is cosmetic. It is believed that normal looking female genitalia encourage a stable gender identity whilst reducing stigma and psychological distress thought to occur in children growing up with ambiguous genitalia. This practice is based on the work of John Money in the 1950’s and 1960’s. His premise was that infants are psychosexually neutral until the age of 2 years and that what is required for a stable normal gender identity is unambiguous genitalia and unequivocal assurance from parents at to the chosen gender.

 

There are no long term data to support this although there is a widely held belief that feminising genital surgery is “successful” both cosmetically and functionally. It is however impossible to predict the true gender identity or sexual preferences of any baby without an Intersex condition and even more difficult with Intersex children. It is most likely that gender identity has a multifactorial basis including anatomical, genetic and endocrine factors. The contribution of genital appearance to gender identity is unknown but men diagnosed  with micropenis in infancy can remain happy with a male gender identity and have a male sexual role (Reilly and Woodhouse 1989).

 

There are no comparative data as yet published comparing women who have undergone surgery to women who have not had surgery. In the USA almost all babies with ambiguous genitalia have undergone genital surgery since the 1950’s. However in the UK surgeons were initially reluctant to perform feminising surgery and there is existing a cohort of older patients who have not had genital surgery.

 

WHAT IS A LARGE CLITORIS?

There are standard measurements available for the average clitoris for a baby. However most clinical assessment of the genitalia is very subjective. The genital appearance changes dramatically at puberty with the deposition of labial and pubic fat and the arrival of pubic hair. What may appear as a large clitoris in a baby may look much less prominent in a teenage or adult. The majority of paediatric surgeons spend little time examining adult female genitalia and may misjudge potential clitoral size. There is a huge variation in size and anatomy of normal female genitalia. The patient herself may be entirely happy with a larger clitoris than average. 

 

FOLLOW-UP DATA

While reports of operative techniques to reduce clitoral size have been numerous, there have been correspondingly few studies looking at outcomes of these surgical techniques. Reasons often put forward for this situation are that much of this surgery is performed on young infants by paediatric urologists and paediatric surgeons. These clinicians will not follow up these children regularly and will therefore not see the adult results of their surgery, either cosmetic or functional. The genitalia and sexual functioning are extremely delicate subjects that may be inappropriate or difficult for a paediatrician or paediatric surgeon to discuss with patients.

 

A literature review to look for functional outcomes of clitoral surgery has shown three groups of studies;

 

1. Small retrospective cohort studies or case reports performed by the original surgeon, with vague outcome parameters. These usually concentrate on surgical technique and most do not assess sexual function in any detail if at all. None of these studies is well reported, and all are subject to many biases.

 

2. Objective neurological assessment

Only one study has attempted to evaluate objective clitoral sensory innervation after surgery. Gearhart et al in 1995 performed pudendal evoked potentials in children before and after clitoral reduction. They used stimulation of the dorsal neurovascular bundle with unipolar electromyegraphic electrodes at the base of the clitoris and EMG response recorded at the tip of the clitoris. He demonstrated preservation of nerve conduction and claimed this may permit normal sexual function in adulthood. This is an inaccurate method to study sensation as it measures large myelinated fibres. Clitoral sensory information is carried in non-myelinated (C fibres)  and small myelinated nerve fibres (Ad)  which can only be assessed by temperature, vibration and light touch. These studies have not been done. In addition Chase (1996) stated that adult women who had undergone genitoplasty as children retained normal pudendal evoked potentials but had impaired sensation and orgasmic response.

 

3. Psychosexual function

Two studies have looked at psychosexual function in detail. Both have been published in psychology journals and have received little surgical exposure.

 

a. May et al (1996) looked at 19 women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia and compared this with a control group of 17 women with diabetes. Structured interviews were taped and analysed. The CAH group reported higher levels of penetration difficulties and a pattern of persistent pain during intercourse. They were less likely to masturbate and less likely to attain orgasm compared with the diabetic group (58.3% compared to 88%). The CAH group were doubtful about the success of surgery and worried about their genital appearance not being normal.

 

b. Dittman et al (1992) looked at 34 women with CAH compared to a control group of 14 sisters. The CAH women were less likely to experience orgasm with masturbation or intercourse. They were also less likely to be sexually active.

 

 

REPEAT PROCEDURES

Repeat clitoral reductions are common especially during adolescence. It is likely that if one procedure interferes with sexual function, then more procedures will do more harm. Repeat procedures are common in children with CAH with poor control or compliance.

 

WHAT DO THE PATIENTS WANT?

The difficulty with feminising surgery on babies is that the decision cannot be made by the patient. All parents want the best for their children and want them to be happy and “normal”. Most clinicians at present believe normal looking genitalia are essential and are happy to recommend and advise surgery.  Whilst parents want to feel able to make their own decisions, they look to the medical profession for guidance. We should be clear for whom we are doing the surgery i.e. clinicians and parents rather than the baby.

 

However adult patients are increasingly expressing dissatisfaction with the outcome of surgery. There is a growing campaign – especially in the USA – for a moratorium on feminising genital surgery. This has led to the establishment of NATFI (North American Taskforce on Intersex) and our current working party.  Some clinicians are also questioning the need for cosmetic genital surgery (Schober 1998, 1999).

 

CURRENT WORK

At UCLH we are looking at long term follow up in adult Intersex womenincluding those who have undergone surgery and those who have not. Our study is a retrospective study comprising a standardised sexual function questionnaire (modified Golombok Rust Inventory of Sexual Satisfaction (GRISS)), full genital examination and full review of medical records including operative notes. So far 131 women have completed the questionnaire and 40 have been examined. Initial results comparing women with ambiguous genitalia during childhood who underwent surgery to those who didn’t suggest a high level of sexual dysfunction in both groups. However the group who had had clitoral surgery were significantly worse off with 26% unable to achieve orgasm by any means (Minto et al 2001).  We have also reviewed anatomical and cosmetic finding in adolescents following childhood surgery and have shown that 77% of children will require further major genital surgery during adolescence and adulthood (Creighton et al 2001).

 

 

CONCLUSIONS

1.      Most data comes from women with CAH. There is no data looking at long-term result of women with other conditions causing virilisation. Research in all areas of sexual function in Intersex women is very scanty and should be encouraged.

2.      Clitoral surgery has a detrimental effect on sexual function particularly on the ability to attain orgasm.

3.      There are little long-term data to confirm or refute the benefit of “normalising” the genital appearance. Gender development is multifactorial and impossible to predict

4.      The effect on female children of having severely virilised genitalia throughout childhood are unknown.  

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS.

1.      Consultation with Intersex  support groups. Seek opinions from adult patients who have undergone surgery and parents of  children who have undergone surgery

2.      All data on effects of sexual function should be discussed with the parents. The option to decline surgery must be discussed.

3.      Clitoral Surgery should be avoided on mild and moderately virilised children.

4.      Clitoral surgery on severely virilised children must be carefully discussed with all involved in the full understanding of effects on future. The possibility of deferring surgery should be discussed with the parents. The possible requirement for further revision surgery must be recognised.

 

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Chase C 1996 Letter of  response J Urol 156:1139

 

Creighton S, Minto C, Steele S 2001  Cosmetic and anatomical outcomes following feminizing childhood surgery for ambiguous genitalia. Presented to N. American Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Gynaecology 2001. Accepted for publication in the Lancet – publication date July 2001

 

Dittman RW, Kappes ME, Kappes MH, 1992 Sexual behaviour in adolescent and adult females with congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Psychoneuroendocrinology Vol17 No2/3 pp153-70

 

 Gearhart JP.,Burnett A.,Owens JH., 1995 Measurement of pudendal evoked potentials during feminising genitoplasty:technique and applications J Urol 153:486-7

 

May B.,Boyle M.,Grant D., 1996 A comparative study of sexual experiences. Journal of Health Psychology vol 1(4) 479-492

 

Minto C, Creighton S, Woodhouse C 2001 Long term sexual function in intersex conditions with ambiguous genitalia. Presented at British Assosciation of Urological Surgeons 2001 (submitted for publication).

 

Money J.,Hampson JG.,Hampson JL 1955 Hermaphroditism:recommendations concerning assignment of sex, change of sex and psychologic management. Bull John Hopkins Hosp  97:284-300

 

Money J.,Hampson JG.,Hampson JL., 1957 Imprinting and the establishment of gender role. Arch.Neurol.Psychiatry 77:333-336

 

Reilly J.,Woodhouse C., 1989 Small penis and the male sexual role. J.Urol 142:569-572

 

Schober JM 1998 Early feminizing genitoplasty or watchful waiting. J. Paedaitr. Adolesce.Gynecol. 11(3):154-6

 

Schober J. 1999 Longterm outcomes and changing attitudes to intersexuality. BJU International 83 Supppl3, 39-50