<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.4" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ojog</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2160-8806</issn>
      <issn pub-type="ppub">2160-8792</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojog.2026.167102</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">ojog-152826</article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group>
          <subject>Article</subject>
        </subj-group>
        <subj-group>
          <subject>Medicine</subject>
          <subject>Healthcare</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Sexual Function and Self-Genital Image after Clitoral Restorative Surgery in Women Who Underwent Female Genital Mutilation in Kenya</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Hassan</surname>
            <given-names>Hawa</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Gichuhi</surname>
            <given-names>Joe Wanyoike</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Qureshi</surname>
            <given-names>Zahida</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Adan</surname>
            <given-names>Abdullahi</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="western">
            <surname>Gang’ombe</surname>
            <given-names>Rukia</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label> Department of Obstetrics &amp; Gynaecology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya </aff>
      <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label> Department of Surgery, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya. </aff>
      <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label> Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Creation Fertility Centre, Nairobi, Kenya </aff>
      <author-notes>
        <fn fn-type="conflict" id="fn-conflict">
          <p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p>
        </fn>
      </author-notes>
      <pub-date pub-type="epub">
        <day>08</day>
        <month>07</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <pub-date pub-type="collection">
        <month>07</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>16</volume>
      <issue>07</issue>
      <fpage>1109</fpage>
      <lpage>1121</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received">
          <day>24</day>
          <month>06</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted">
          <day>25</day>
          <month>07</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="published">
          <day>28</day>
          <month>07</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>© 2026 by the authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2026</copyright-year>
        <license license-type="open-access">
          <license-p> This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link> ). </license-p>
        </license>
      </permissions>
      <self-uri content-type="doi" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2026.167102">https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2026.167102</self-uri>
      <abstract>
        <p><bold>Background:</bold>Clitoral restoration surgery also known as clitoroplasty, is a procedure aimed at re-exposing the clitoral remnant with or without defibulation to restore function for females who have undergone genital mutilation. The procedure remains controversial because of paucity of data for studies using validated outcome measures to document the efficacy and safety of clitoral restorative surgery. <bold>Objective</bold>: To assess sexual function and self-genital image after clitoral restorative surgery in women who had previously undergone female genital mutilation/cut. <bold>Design:</bold> A cross-sectional study. <bold>Setting:</bold> The Platinum surgery center in Nairobi, Kenya. <bold>Subjects/Participants</bold>: Ninety-six patients who underwent clitoral restorative surgery following female genital mutilation. <bold>Results:</bold> Majority of the study participants were aged below 35 years (54.5%), had college education (68.0%), married (53.3%), Christian (81.3%) and hailed from the Meru ethnic group (22.9%). Most study subjects had FGM/C type II (55.8%). A big proportion of the study participants were satisfied with their self-genital image (52.1%). The commonest indications for clitoral restorative surgery were low self-esteem (89.6%), failure to achieve orgasm (47.9%) followed by lack of self-identity (39.6%). The prevalence of Female Sexual Dysfunction (FSD) was 70.7% with majority of the women reporting moderate sexual desire (46.3%), poor arousal (46.3), inadequate lubrication (39%), lack of orgasm (39%), deficient satisfaction (51.2%) and moderate to high pain perception (36.6%) after clitoral restorative surgery. <bold>Conclusion</bold>: Clitoral reconstructive surgery enhances genital self-image but does not necessarily improve sexual function of women with FGM/C.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group kwd-group-type="author-generated" xml:lang="en">
        <kwd>Genital Mutilation</kwd>
        <kwd>Clitoplasty</kwd>
        <kwd>Genital Self-Image</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec1">
      <title>1. Introduction</title>
      <p>The World Health Organization (WHO) defines female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) as any operation involving partial or total removal of female external genitalia or other injury to female external genital organs for non-medical purposes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>]. While the precise number of women who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) globally remains unknown, UNICEF estimates that at least 200 million women and girls across 30 countries have undergone the practice, the majority of whom live in low-income countries [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">2</xref>]. The prevalence in Kenya is about 21.0%, as per the 2014 Kenya Demographic Health Survey [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">3</xref>]. FGM/C may include the clitoris (type I), labia minora or majora (type II), narrowing of the vaginal opening (type III) or any harmful genital procedure for non-medical reasons (type 4) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>]. The mutilation of the genitals destroys the neurovascular as well as muscular mechanisms responsible for normal sexual function [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">4</xref>]. The damage or cutting of the genital in female is done with an essence of reducing the desire of having sex in women. The excision of the inner clitoris influences the will of having sex and reaching orgasm [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>]. Long-term sexual dysfunction owing to FGM/C was recorded, including dyspareunia, reduced sexual function, willingness and excitement, reduced lubrication, decreased orgasm and anorgasmia [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>]. Since most erectile tissues are not excised, part of the cut clitoris recoils meaning healthy women with FGM/C may still attain orgasm and experience sexual interactions that satisfy them. Under the scar tissue, the palpable clitoral stump can be exposed, a neo-glans reconstructed and repositioned on the clitoral anatomical site; this is what clitoral restoration entails [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>].</p>
      <p>Reconstruction of the clitoris after mutilation in females is a novel medical procedure that has been conveyed as an efficient and viable approach for reducing clitoral pain, improving the excitement of sex and restoring the appearance of the vulvar comparable to females who are not gone through FGM/C [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>]. Clitoral reconstructive surgery has been reported to enhance sexual function as it reduces clitoral pain by removing peri-clitoral fibrosis, making the clitoris more available to stimulation, which creates a new external clitoris and restores a more normal genital appearance<sup>.</sup>[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>].</p>
      <p>For several thousand years, female genital mutilation/cut has been performed, yet scientific research has been restricted on the reasons why it continues today and the complete magnitude of the health harm it creates. Knowledge on measures to enhance health of women undergoing the operation is under documented. </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec2">
      <title>2. Materials and Methods</title>
      <sec id="sec2dot1">
        <title>2.1. Study Design</title>
        <p>This was a cross-sectional study. The inclusion criteria comprised of women age 18 to 45 years who had undergone clitoral restorative surgery done following FGM/C in the months of January and February 2020. Women who did not consent were excluded from the study. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and female self-genital image (FGSIS) tool used to assess sexual function and genital image post-surgery. Female sexual dysfunction was defined as FSFI score of less than or equal to 26.55 while lack of genital self-image satisfaction was defined as FGSIS score of less than 22.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot2">
        <title>2.2. Study Setting</title>
        <p>The study was done at the Platinum surgery center in Hurlingham area of Nairobi, Kenya. This center is a private facility dealing with aesthetic/plastic surgery. </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot3">
        <title>2.3. Subjects and Participants</title>
        <p>Ninety-six patients who underwent clitoral restorative surgery following FGM/C. </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot4">
        <title>2.4. Sample Size Determination</title>
        <p>The Fisher, 1981 formula was used to calculate the sample size using assumptions from Foldes <italic>et al</italic><italic>.</italic> who reported an increased sexual desire in 81.0% of women who had undergone clitoral reconstructive surgery and 5% as the desired precision.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot5">
        <title>2.5. Data Collection</title>
        <p>Patients who underwent clitoral restorative surgery at Platinum Surgery Center were identified and serialized. The patients were recruited during their postoperative follow up visit at which point they were explained to the purpose of the study and consent sought. A pre-designed consent form outlining the study purpose, procedure, potential benefits and possible risks was used to obtain written informed consent. The qualified women were then called and phone interviews conducted using an interviewer-administered questionnaire to assess their Genital Self Image and Female Sexual Function 6 months after the surgery. Potential participants who declined to offer consent were replaced sequentially by the next eligible participant until a sample size of 96 was obtained.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot6">
        <title>2.6. Data Analysis</title>
        <p>Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 21.0 was used to analyze data. The demographic characteristics of patients were analyzed, and presented as frequencies, ratios, and means with standard deviations. The association between patient characteristics and sexual function and genital image was analyzed using the chi square test and Logistic regression to identify risk factors and predictors. Statistical analysis was done at 95% confidence level, with a p &lt; 0.05 considered to be statistically significant.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec2dot7">
        <title>2.7. Ethical Consideration</title>
        <p>The study was approved by the Kenyatta National Hospital/University of Nairobi Ethics Research Committee. Scientific content and compliance with applicable research and human subjects’ regulations was observed. The participants provided written consent for participation.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec3">
      <title>3. Results</title>
      <p>Of the 127 women who underwent clitoral restoration surgery, 25 were not reachable via phone. Of the 102 who were reachable, 97 consented to participate in the study, 1 of whom was excluded due to incomplete data in their clinical file, as shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>. </p>
      <fig id="fig1">
        <label>Figure 1</label>
        <graphic xlink:href="https://html.scirp.org/file/1434022-rId13.jpeg?20260728120410" />
      </fig>
      <p><bold>Figure 1.</bold>Study flow chart.</p>
      <sec id="sec3dot1">
        <title>3.1. Demographic Characteristics</title>
        <p>Majority of the study participants were aged below 35 years (54.5%), had college education (68.0%), married (53.3%), Christian (81.3%) and hailed from the Meru ethnic group (22.9%). Most study subjects had FGM/C type II (55.8%). The commonest indications for clitoral restorative surgery was low self-esteem (89.6%), failure to achieve orgasm (47.9%) followed by lack of self-identity (39.6%) as shown in <bold>Table 1</bold>.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 1</bold><bold>.</bold>Demographic data of women who underwent clitoral restorative surgery in Kenya.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl1">
          <label>Table 1</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>N (96)</td>
                <td>%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="2">Age (years)</td>
                <td>&lt;35</td>
                <td>48</td>
                <td>54.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>35 and above</td>
                <td>40</td>
                <td>45.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Education</td>
                <td>Primary</td>
                <td>6</td>
                <td>0.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Secondary</td>
                <td>36</td>
                <td>37.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>College</td>
                <td>58</td>
                <td>60.4</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Marital status</td>
                <td>Married</td>
                <td>48</td>
                <td>50.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Single</td>
                <td>40</td>
                <td>41.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Divorced</td>
                <td>8</td>
                <td>8.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="12">Ethnic group</td>
                <td>Abagusii</td>
                <td>18</td>
                <td>18.8</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Borana</td>
                <td>2</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Embu</td>
                <td>14</td>
                <td>14.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Akamba</td>
                <td>4</td>
                <td>4.2</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Agikuyu</td>
                <td>12</td>
                <td>12.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Luo</td>
                <td>2</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Maasai</td>
                <td>2</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Mbeere</td>
                <td>2</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Meru</td>
                <td>22</td>
                <td>22.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Samburu</td>
                <td>2</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Somali</td>
                <td>14</td>
                <td>14.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Taita</td>
                <td>2</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="2">Religion</td>
                <td>Christian</td>
                <td>78</td>
                <td>81.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Muslim</td>
                <td>18</td>
                <td>18.8</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="5">FGM/C type</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>86</td>
                <td>89.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>I</td>
                <td>8</td>
                <td>9.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>II</td>
                <td>48</td>
                <td>55.8</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>III</td>
                <td>30</td>
                <td>34.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unknown</td>
                <td>10</td>
                <td>10.4</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="7">Reason for surgery</td>
                <td>Pain relief</td>
                <td>16</td>
                <td>16.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Inability to have Orgasm</td>
                <td>46</td>
                <td>47.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Regain identity</td>
                <td>38</td>
                <td>39.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Improve self esteem</td>
                <td>86</td>
                <td>89.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Improve sensation</td>
                <td>26</td>
                <td>27.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Improve relationship with partner</td>
                <td>30</td>
                <td>31.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Stop stigma</td>
                <td>1</td>
                <td>1.0</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot2">
        <title>3.2. Genital Self-Image Following Clitoral Restorative Surgery</title>
        <p>A big proportion of the study participants were satisfied with their self-genital image (52.1%), the appearance of their genitals (37.5%) felt comfortable allowing their sexual partners look at their genitals (64.6%), as depicted in <bold>Table 2</bold>.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 2</bold><bold>.</bold> Genital self-image of women who underwent clitoral restorative surgery.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl2">
          <label>Table 2</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td colspan="2">
                </td>
                <td>N (96)</td>
                <td>%</td>
                <td>Cum.%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="2">Female Genital Self Image</td>
                <td>Satisfied</td>
                <td>50</td>
                <td>52.1</td>
                <td>52.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unsatisfied</td>
                <td>46</td>
                <td>47.9</td>
                <td>100</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="4">I am satisfied with the appearance of my genitals</td>
                <td>Strongly agree</td>
                <td>26</td>
                <td>27.1</td>
                <td>27.1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Agree</td>
                <td>36</td>
                <td>37.5</td>
                <td>64.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Disagree</td>
                <td>14</td>
                <td>14.6</td>
                <td>79.2</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Strongly disagree</td>
                <td>20</td>
                <td>20.8</td>
                <td>100.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="4">I feel comfortable letting a sexual partner look at my genitals</td>
                <td>Strongly agree</td>
                <td>20</td>
                <td>20.8</td>
                <td>20.8</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Agree</td>
                <td>42</td>
                <td>43.8</td>
                <td>64.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Disagree</td>
                <td>16</td>
                <td>16.7</td>
                <td>81.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Strongly disagree</td>
                <td>18</td>
                <td>18.8</td>
                <td>100.0</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot3">
        <title>3.3. Correlation between Sociodemographic Characteristics and Genital Self-Image</title>
        <p>After controlling for covariance between ethnic group and religion, a significant correlation was noted between religion and genital self-image in that Christian women were five times more likely to be satisfied with genital self-image than Muslim women following clitoral restoration (OR (95% CI) = 5.03 (1.52 - 16.7), p &lt; 0.01). However, there was no association between genital self-image and age, education level, ethnic group or type of FGM/C as shown in <bold>Table 3</bold>.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot4">
        <title>3.4. Female Sexual Function of Women Who Underwent Clitoral Restorative Surgery</title>
        <p>Of the 96 study subjects, 82 had resumed sexual intercourse after clitoral restorative surgery and were examined for female sexual function using the FSFI score. The prevalence of Female Sexual Dysfunction (FSD) was 70.7% with majority of the women reporting moderate sexual desire (46.3%), low arousal (46.3), low lubrication (39%), low orgasm (39%), low satisfaction (51.2%) and moderate to high pain perception (36.6%) after clitoral restorative surgery, as shown in <bold>Table 4</bold>.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec3dot5">
        <title>3.5. Correlation between Sociodemographic Characteristics and Female Sexual Function</title>
        <p>A positive correlation was observed between female sexual dysfunction and age more than or equal to 35 years (OR (95% CI) 3.04 (1.08 - 8.51), p = 0.03). Female sexual dysfunction was significantly more evident among those who had FGM/C type III (OR (95% CI) = 5.5 (0.95 - 31.6), p = 0.04). However, age, education level, marital status, ethnicity, religion and female genital self-image did not influence female sexual function among women who underwent clitoral reconstructive surgery as shown in <bold>Table 5</bold>.</p>
        <p><bold>Table 3</bold><bold>.</bold> Correlation between sociodemographic characteristics and genital self-image based of the FGSIS score.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl3">
          <label>Table 3</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="2">
                </td>
                <td rowspan="2">
                </td>
                <td colspan="2">FGSIS</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Satisfied</td>
                <td>Unsatisfied</td>
                <td>OR (95% CI)</td>
                <td>P value</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Age</td>
                <td>&lt;35</td>
                <td>22 (45.8)</td>
                <td>26 (54.2)</td>
                <td>1.77 (0.75 - 4.15)</td>
                <td>0.18</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>35+</td>
                <td>24 (60.0)</td>
                <td>16 (40.0)</td>
                <td>Reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unknown</td>
                <td>4</td>
                <td>4</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="4">Education level</td>
                <td>Primary</td>
                <td>4 (66.7)</td>
                <td>2 (33.3)</td>
                <td>Reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Secondary</td>
                <td>6 (30.0)</td>
                <td>14 (70.0)</td>
                <td>0.21 (0.03 - 1.50)</td>
                <td>0.10</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>College</td>
                <td>32 (55.2)</td>
                <td>26 (44.8)</td>
                <td>0.61 (0.10 - 3.63)</td>
                <td>0.58</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>8</td>
                <td>4</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="12">Ethnic group</td>
                <td>Abagusii</td>
                <td>10 (55.6)</td>
                <td>8 (44.6)</td>
                <td>1.19 (0.42 - 3.33)</td>
                <td>0.32</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Borana</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.13</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Embu</td>
                <td>8 (57.1)</td>
                <td>6 (42.9)</td>
                <td>1.27 (0.40 - 3.99)</td>
                <td>0.41</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Akamba</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>4 (100)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.03</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Agikuyu</td>
                <td>12 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>&lt;0.01</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Luo</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.17</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Maasai</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.17</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Mbeere</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.13</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Meru</td>
                <td>12 (54.5)</td>
                <td>10 (45.5)</td>
                <td>1.14 (0.43 - 2.96)</td>
                <td>0.78</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Samburu</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.13</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Somali</td>
                <td>4</td>
                <td>10</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Taita</td>
                <td>0</td>
                <td>2</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.13</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Religion</td>
                <td>Christian</td>
                <td>46 (59.0)</td>
                <td>32 (41.0)</td>
                <td>5.03 (1.52 - 16.7)</td>
                <td>&lt;0.01</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Muslim</td>
                <td>4 (22.2)</td>
                <td>14 (77.8)</td>
                <td>Reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>No</td>
                <td>6 (42.9)</td>
                <td>8 (57.1)</td>
                <td>Reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="4">Type of FGM/c</td>
                <td>I</td>
                <td>4 (50.0)</td>
                <td>4 (50.0)</td>
                <td>Reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>II</td>
                <td>28 (58.3)</td>
                <td>20 (41.7)</td>
                <td>1.40 (0.31 - 6.28)</td>
                <td>0.65</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>III</td>
                <td>12 (40.0)</td>
                <td>18 (60.0)</td>
                <td>0.66 (0.13 - 3.19)</td>
                <td>0.61</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unknown</td>
                <td>6</td>
                <td>4</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p><bold>Table 4</bold><bold>.</bold>Female Sexual Function of women who underwent post-clitoral restorative surgery.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl4">
          <label>Table 4</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td colspan="2">
                </td>
                <td>N (82)</td>
                <td>%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="2">Sexual function</td>
                <td>FSD</td>
                <td>58</td>
                <td>70.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Satisfied</td>
                <td>24</td>
                <td>29.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Desire</td>
                <td>Low</td>
                <td>26</td>
                <td>31.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Moderate</td>
                <td>38</td>
                <td>46.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>High</td>
                <td>18</td>
                <td>22.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Arousal</td>
                <td>Low</td>
                <td>38</td>
                <td>46.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Moderate</td>
                <td>26</td>
                <td>31.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>High</td>
                <td>18</td>
                <td>22.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Lubrication</td>
                <td>Low</td>
                <td>32</td>
                <td>39.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Moderate</td>
                <td>30</td>
                <td>36.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>High</td>
                <td>20</td>
                <td>24.4</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Orgasm</td>
                <td>Low</td>
                <td>42</td>
                <td>51.2</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Moderate</td>
                <td>24</td>
                <td>29.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>High</td>
                <td>16</td>
                <td>19.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Satisfaction</td>
                <td>Low</td>
                <td>42</td>
                <td>51.2</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Moderate</td>
                <td>16</td>
                <td>19.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>High</td>
                <td>24</td>
                <td>29.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Pain</td>
                <td>High</td>
                <td>30</td>
                <td>36.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Moderate</td>
                <td>30</td>
                <td>36.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Low</td>
                <td>22</td>
                <td>26.8</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p><bold>Table 5</bold><bold>.</bold> Female sexual function and demographic characteristics of women who underwent clitoral restorative surgery.</p>
        <table-wrap id="tbl5">
          <label>Table 5</label>
          <table>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="2">
                </td>
                <td rowspan="2">
                </td>
                <td colspan="2">Sexual Function</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>FSD (58)</td>
                <td>Satisfied (24)</td>
                <td>OR (95% CI)</td>
                <td>P</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="3">Age group</td>
                <td>&lt;35</td>
                <td>24 (58.5)</td>
                <td>17 (41.5)</td>
                <td>Reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>35 and above</td>
                <td>30 (81.1)</td>
                <td>7 (18.9)</td>
                <td>3.04 (1.08 - 8.51)</td>
                <td>
                  <bold>0.03</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unknown</td>
                <td>4</td>
                <td>0</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="4">Education</td>
                <td>Primary</td>
                <td>4 (66.7)</td>
                <td>2 (33.3)</td>
                <td>Reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Secondary</td>
                <td>12 (75.0)</td>
                <td>4 (25.0)</td>
                <td>1.50 (0.19 - 11.5)</td>
                <td>0.69</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>College</td>
                <td>36 (72.0)</td>
                <td>14 (28.0)</td>
                <td>1.21 (0.19 - 7.41)</td>
                <td>0.83</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unknown</td>
                <td>6</td>
                <td>4</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="4">Marital status</td>
                <td>Married</td>
                <td>32 (66.7)</td>
                <td>16 (33.3)</td>
                <td>0.88 (0.31 - 2.48)</td>
                <td>0.82</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Single</td>
                <td>18 (69.2)</td>
                <td>8 (30.8)</td>
                <td>Reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Divorced</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.35</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unknown</td>
                <td>6</td>
                <td>0</td>
                <td>
                </td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="12">Ethnic group</td>
                <td>Abagusii</td>
                <td>14 (87.5)</td>
                <td>2 (12.5)</td>
                <td>3.50 (0.73 - 16.8)</td>
                <td>0.10</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Borana</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.35</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Embu</td>
                <td>10 (71.4)</td>
                <td>4 (28.6)</td>
                <td>1.04 (0.29 - 3.72)</td>
                <td>0.94</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Akamba</td>
                <td>4 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.18</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Agikuyu</td>
                <td>2 (20.0)</td>
                <td>8 (80.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>
                  <bold>-</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Luo</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>
                  <bold>-</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Maasai</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>
                  <bold>-</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Mbeere</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.35</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Meru</td>
                <td>10 (71.4)</td>
                <td>4 (28.6)</td>
                <td>1.04 (0.29 - 3.72)</td>
                <td>0.94</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Samburu</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.35</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Somali</td>
                <td>10 (83.3)</td>
                <td>2 (16.7)</td>
                <td>2.29 (0.46 - 11.4)</td>
                <td>0.29</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Taita</td>
                <td>2 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.35</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="2">Religion</td>
                <td>Christian</td>
                <td>44 (66.7)</td>
                <td>22 (33.3)</td>
                <td>reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Muslim</td>
                <td>14 (87.5)</td>
                <td>2 (12.5)</td>
                <td>3.50 (0.73 - 16.8)</td>
                <td>0.10</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="4">Type of FGM/C</td>
                <td>I</td>
                <td>4 (50.0)</td>
                <td>4 (50.0)</td>
                <td>reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>II</td>
                <td>24 (60.0)</td>
                <td>16 (40.0)</td>
                <td>1.50 (0.32 - 6.88)</td>
                <td>0.60</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>III</td>
                <td>22 (84.6)</td>
                <td>4 (15.4)</td>
                <td>5.50 (0.95 - 31.6)</td>
                <td>
                  <bold>0.04</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unknown</td>
                <td>8</td>
                <td>0</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>-</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="2">Female genital self-image</td>
                <td>Satisfied</td>
                <td>20 (45.5)</td>
                <td>24 (54.5)</td>
                <td>reference</td>
                <td>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Unsatisfied</td>
                <td>38 (100)</td>
                <td>0 (0.0)</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>
                  <bold>-</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec4">
      <title>4. Discussion</title>
      <p>The objective of this study was to determine genital self-image, female sexual function, and the factors associated with these sexual health parameters following clitoral restorative surgery among women with a history of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C).</p>
      <p>FGM/C is most prevalent in the North Eastern, Eastern, Nyanza, and Rift Valley regions of Kenya [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>]-[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">12</xref>]. Consistent with this distribution, most women who sought clitoral restorative surgery in this study belonged to the Meru, Abagusii, Embu, and Somali communities. The majority were young, married, Christian, and had attained a secondary or tertiary level of education. The high educational status observed among participants may have facilitated greater awareness of reconstructive surgical options and improved access to specialized healthcare services.</p>
      <p>Women with FGM/C Types II and III comprised the largest proportion of those seeking clitoral restorative surgery. Given the greater extent of tissue excision and distortion of vulvar anatomy associated with these forms of FGM/C, they are more likely to result in sexual dysfunction, altered genital sensation, body image concerns, and other long-term psychosexual sequelae, thereby increasing the likelihood of seeking reconstructive intervention.</p>
      <p>The primary reasons reported for pursuing clitoral restorative surgery were low self-esteem, inability to achieve orgasm, diminished genital sensation, loss of self-identity, and difficulties in intimate relationships. These findings highlight the profound physical, psychological, and psychosexual consequences of FGM/C and emphasize the multifaceted motivations underlying the decision to undergo reconstructive surgery. Similar findings have been reported by Jordal <italic>et al.</italic> in Sweden, where women cited symbolic restitution, reduction of visible stigma, restoration of bodily integrity, and improvements in intimacy, sexual function, and genital appearance as the principal motivations for undergoing clitoral restorative surgery [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">13</xref>].</p>
      <p>Clitoral restorative surgery was associated with improved genital self-image, with more than half of the women reporting high levels of satisfaction with their genital appearance and feeling comfortable with their partners viewing their genitalia following surgery. These findings suggest that the procedure may contribute to enhanced self-acceptance and body image among women with a history of FGM/C. However, the lower uptake of surgery among Muslim women and older women in this cohort highlights the need for culturally sensitive awareness and educational initiatives to improve knowledge of available reconstructive options and facilitate equitable access to care for women who may benefit from the procedure. Our findings are consistent with previous studies evaluating the outcomes of clitoral restorative surgery. Seifeldin <italic>et al.</italic> reported that more than 90% of women who underwent surgical repair for FGM/C Types II and III at a women’s teaching hospital in Egypt experienced improved cosmetic satisfaction and psychological wellbeing [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">14</xref>]. Similarly, Goodman <italic>et al.</italic> demonstrated significant improvements in genital self-image and overall body esteem among 120 women who underwent clitoral restorative surgery in California, USA [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">15</xref>]. </p>
      <p>In this study, Christian women were five times more likely than Muslim women to report satisfaction with their genital self-image following clitoral restorative surgery. This disparity may reflect differences in cultural perceptions of FGM/C and reconstructive surgery, as well as variations in the availability of social support. These findings underscore the importance of culturally sensitive awareness and educational initiatives to improve understanding and acceptance of reconstructive options among affected communities. However, further research is warranted to elucidate the underlying factors contributing to this observed disparity.</p>
      <p>Traditionally, genital surgical restoration is done to improve both the genital self-image and female sexual function. While an improvement in the genital self-image was observed, surgical restoration did not translate to a significant improvement in female sexual function in this study. More than 70% of participants met the criteria for female sexual dysfunction, with genital pain, inadequate lubrication, impaired orgasm, reduced sexual satisfaction, and diminished sexual desire identified as the predominant contributing. Post-operative dyspareunia has been identified as a strong predictor for sexual dysfunction with women exhibiting the symptom reported to have a higher risk of female sexual dysfunction [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">16</xref>]. Similar findings were reported by Esho <italic>et al.</italic> in Kenya, where women described persistent challenges related to sexual desire, arousal, and satisfaction following genital reconstructive surgery [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">17</xref>]. Likewise, Goodman <italic>et al.</italic> reported a decline in physical and sexual functioning after surgery [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">15</xref>]. </p>
      <p>The identifiable factors associated with female sexual dysfunction following clitoral restorative surgery in this study were age equal to or above 35 years and type III FGM/C. The factors associated with female sexual dysfunction following clitoral restorative surgery in this study were age ≥ 35 years and Type III FGM/C. The association between increasing age and female sexual dysfunction is consistent with previous evidence demonstrating an age-related decline in sexual function, which has been attributed to hormonal changes, comorbidities, and psychosocial factors that adversely affect sexual desire, arousal, lubrication, and orgasm [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">18</xref>]. Similarly, women with Type III FGM/C may be at greater risk of persistent sexual dysfunction because of the more extensive anatomical disruption, scarring, and chronic pain associated with infibulation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>], all of which may influence postoperative sexual outcomes and potentially confound the relationship between clitoral restorative surgery and sexual function.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec5">
      <title>5. Study Strengths and Limitations</title>
      <p>Genital self-image and female sexual function were not evaluated prior to clitoral restorative surgery, limiting the study’s ability to establish a causal relationship between clitoral restorative surgery and the observed outcomes. Nevertheless, the primary outcomes were evaluated using internationally validated instruments enhancing the reliability, reproducibility, and comparability of our findings with other studies. To the best of current knowledge, this is among the first studies from sub-Saharan Africa evaluating genital self-image and sexual function after clitoral restorative surgery. The study provides locally relevant evidence from a high prevalence FGM/C setting, thereby addressing an important gap in the literature.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec6">
      <title>6. Conclusion</title>
      <p>Clitoral restorative surgery is associated with improved genital self-image among women with a history of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). However, female sexual dysfunction remains high, particularly among women aged ≥ 35 years and those with Type III FGM/C. These findings highlight the need for comprehensive care, including psychosexual counseling, pain management, and appropriate preoperative counseling to optimize postoperative outcomes.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <title>References</title>
      <ref id="B1">
        <label>1.</label>
        <mixed-citation publication-type="web">Female Genital Mutilation. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B2">
        <label>2.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">United Nations Children’s Fund (2016) Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Global Concern UNICEF’s Data Work on FGM/C Support for Data Collection Data Analysis and Dissemination. UNICEF.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <year>2016</year>
            <article-title>Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Global Concern UNICEF’s Data Work on FGM/C Support for Data Collection Data Analysis and Dissemination</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B3">
        <label>3.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Ojiambo, R., Gibson, A.R., Konstabel, K., Lieberman, D.E., Speakman, J.R., Reilly, J.J., <italic>et al</italic>. (2013) Free-Living Physical Activity and Energy Expenditure of Rural Children and Adolescents in the Nandi Region of Kenya. <italic>Annals</italic><italic>of</italic><italic>Human</italic><italic>Biology</italic>, 40, 318-323. https://doi.org/10.3109/03014460.2013.775344 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3109/03014460.2013.775344</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23837829</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3109/03014460.2013.775344">https://doi.org/10.3109/03014460.2013.775344</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Ojiambo, R.</string-name>
              <string-name>Gibson, A.R.</string-name>
              <string-name>Konstabel, K.</string-name>
              <string-name>Lieberman, D.E.</string-name>
              <string-name>Speakman, J.R.</string-name>
              <string-name>Reilly, J.J.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2013</year>
            <article-title>Free-Living Physical Activity and Energy Expenditure of Rural Children and Adolescents in the Nandi Region of Kenya</article-title>
            <source>Annals of Human Biology</source>
            <volume>40</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3109/03014460.2013.775344</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23837829</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B4">
        <label>4.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Berg, R.C. and Underland, V. (2012) Gynecological Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C). <italic>Mental Health &amp; Counselling Services</italic>, 11, Article 121.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Berg, R.C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Underland, V.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2012</year>
            <article-title>Gynecological Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C)</article-title>
            <source>Mental Health &amp; Counselling Services</source>
            <volume>11</volume>
            <elocation-id>121</elocation-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B5">
        <label>5.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Paterson, L.Q.P., Davis, S.N. and Binik, Y.M. (2012) Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting and Orgasm before and after Surgical Repair. <italic>Sexologies</italic>, 21, 3-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sexol.2011.09.005 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.sexol.2011.09.005</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sexol.2011.09.005">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sexol.2011.09.005</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Paterson, L.Q.P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Davis, S.N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Binik, Y.M.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2012</year>
            <article-title>Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting and Orgasm before and after Surgical Repair</article-title>
            <source>Sexologies</source>
            <volume>21</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.sexol.2011.09.005</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B6">
        <label>6.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Zhang, G.Y., Li, Q.F., Cai, J.L., <italic>et al</italic>. (2012) Reconstructive Surgery after Female Genital Mutilation. <italic>The</italic><italic>Lancet</italic>, 380, 1468-1469. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61835-2 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61835-2</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23101709</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61835-2">https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61835-2</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Zhang, G.Y.</string-name>
              <string-name>Li, Q.F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Cai, J.L.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2012</year>
            <article-title>Reconstructive Surgery after Female Genital Mutilation</article-title>
            <source>The Lancet</source>
            <volume>6736</volume>
            <issue>12</issue>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61835-2</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23101709</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B7">
        <label>7.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Meremikwu, C., Oringanje, C., Moses, C., Otonkue, M., Odey, F., Ezebialu, I., <italic>et al</italic>. (2026) Clitoral Reconstructive Surgery in Women and Girls Living with Female Genital Mutilation: A Systematic Review. <italic>International Journal of Gynecology &amp; Obstetrics</italic>, 172, 81-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.70760 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/ijgo.70760</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.70760">https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.70760</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Meremikwu, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Oringanje, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Moses, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Otonkue, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Odey, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Ezebialu, I.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2026</year>
            <article-title>Clitoral Reconstructive Surgery in Women and Girls Living with Female Genital Mutilation: A Systematic Review</article-title>
            <source>International Journal of Gynecology &amp; Obstetrics</source>
            <volume>172</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/ijgo.70760</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B8">
        <label>8.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Sharif Mohamed, F., Wild, V., Earp, B.D., Johnson-Agbakwu, C. and Abdulcadir, J. (2020) Clitoral Reconstruction after Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Review of Surgical Techniques and Ethical Debate. <italic>The Journal of Sexual Medicine</italic>, 17, 531-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.12.004 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.12.004</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31932257</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.12.004">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.12.004</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Mohamed, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Wild, V.</string-name>
              <string-name>Earp, B.D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Johnson-Agbakwu, C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Abdulcadir, J.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2020</year>
            <article-title>Clitoral Reconstruction after Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Review of Surgical Techniques and Ethical Debate</article-title>
            <source>The Journal of Sexual Medicine</source>
            <volume>17</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.12.004</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31932257</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B9">
        <label>9.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Shell-Duncan, B., Gathara, D. and Moore, Z. (2017) Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in Kenya: Is Change Taking Place? Descriptive Statistics from Four Waves of Demographic and Health Surveys.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Shell-Duncan, B.</string-name>
              <string-name>Gathara, D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Moore, Z.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2017</year>
            <article-title>Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in Kenya: Is Change Taking Place? Descriptive Statistics from Four Waves of Demographic and Health Surveys</article-title>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B10">
        <label>10.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Graamans, E.P., Zolnikov, T.R., Smet, E., Nguura, P.N., Leshore, L.C. and Have, S.T. (2019) Lessons Learned from Implementing Alternative Rites in the Fight against Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting. <italic>Pan African Medical Journal</italic>, 32, Article 59. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2019.32.59.17624 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.11604/pamj.2019.32.59.17624</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31223351</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2019.32.59.17624">https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2019.32.59.17624</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Graamans, E.P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Zolnikov, T.R.</string-name>
              <string-name>Smet, E.</string-name>
              <string-name>Nguura, P.N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Leshore, L.C.</string-name>
              <string-name>Have, S.T.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2019</year>
            <article-title>Lessons Learned from Implementing Alternative Rites in the Fight against Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting</article-title>
            <source>Pan African Medical Journal</source>
            <volume>32</volume>
            <elocation-id>59</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.11604/pamj.2019.32.59.17624</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31223351</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B11">
        <label>11.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Richard, F., Ahmed, W., Denholm, N., Dawson, A., Varol, N., Essén, B., <italic>et al</italic>. (2017) Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: Sharing Data and Experiences to Accelerate Eradication and Improve Care: Part 2. <italic>Reproductive Health</italic>, 14, Article No. 115. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-017-0362-x <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12978-017-0362-x</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-017-0362-x">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-017-0362-x</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Richard, F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Ahmed, W.</string-name>
              <string-name>Denholm, N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Dawson, A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Varol, N.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2017</year>
            <article-title>Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: Sharing Data and Experiences to Accelerate Eradication and Improve Care: Part 2</article-title>
            <source>Reproductive Health</source>
            <volume>14</volume>
            <elocation-id>No</elocation-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12978-017-0362-x</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B12">
        <label>12.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Klein, E., Helzner, E., Shayowitz, M., Kohlhoff, S. and Smith-Norowitz, T.A. (2018) Female Genital Mutilation: Health Consequences and Complications—A Short Literature Review. <italic>Obstetrics and Gynecology International</italic>, 2018, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7365715 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1155/2018/7365715</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30116269</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7365715">https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7365715</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Klein, E.</string-name>
              <string-name>Helzner, E.</string-name>
              <string-name>Shayowitz, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kohlhoff, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Smith-Norowitz, T.A.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2018</year>
            <article-title>Female Genital Mutilation: Health Consequences and Complications—A Short Literature Review</article-title>
            <source>Obstetrics and Gynecology International</source>
            <volume>2018</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1155/2018/7365715</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30116269</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B13">
        <label>13.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Jordal, M., Griffin, G. and Sigurjonsson, H. (2019) ‘I Want What Every Other Woman Has’: Reasons for Wanting Clitoral Reconstructive Surgery after Female Genital Cutting—A Qualitative Study from Sweden. <italic>Culture</italic>, <italic>Health &amp; Sexuality</italic>, 21, 701-716. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2018.1510980 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/13691058.2018.1510980</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30345886</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2018.1510980">https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2018.1510980</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Jordal, M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Griffin, G.</string-name>
              <string-name>Sigurjonsson, H.</string-name>
              <string-name>Culture, H</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2019</year>
            <article-title>‘I Want What Every Other Woman Has’: Reasons for Wanting Clitoral Reconstructive Surgery after Female Genital Cutting—A Qualitative Study from Sweden</article-title>
            <source>Culture</source>
            <volume>21</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/13691058.2018.1510980</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30345886</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B14">
        <label>14.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Seifeldin, A. (2016) Genital Reconstructive Surgery after Female Genital Mutilation. <italic>Obstetrics &amp; Gynecology International Journal</italic>, 4, 198-201. https://doi.org/10.15406/ogij.2016.04.00129 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15406/ogij.2016.04.00129</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.15406/ogij.2016.04.00129">https://doi.org/10.15406/ogij.2016.04.00129</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Seifeldin, A.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2016</year>
            <article-title>Genital Reconstructive Surgery after Female Genital Mutilation</article-title>
            <source>Obstetrics &amp; Gynecology International Journal</source>
            <volume>4</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15406/ogij.2016.04.00129</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B15">
        <label>15.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Goodman, M.P., Placik, O.J., Matlock, D.L., Simopoulos, A.F., Dalton, T.A., Veale, D., <italic>et al</italic>. (2016) Evaluation of Body Image and Sexual Satisfaction in Women Undergoing Female Genital Plastic/Cosmetic Surgery. <italic>Aesthetic Surgery Journal</italic>, 36, 1048-1057. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjw061 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/asj/sjw061</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27084062</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjw061">https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjw061</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Goodman, M.P.</string-name>
              <string-name>Placik, O.J.</string-name>
              <string-name>Matlock, D.L.</string-name>
              <string-name>Simopoulos, A.F.</string-name>
              <string-name>Dalton, T.A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Veale, D.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2016</year>
            <article-title>Evaluation of Body Image and Sexual Satisfaction in Women Undergoing Female Genital Plastic/Cosmetic Surgery</article-title>
            <source>Aesthetic Surgery Journal</source>
            <volume>36</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/asj/sjw061</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27084062</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B16">
        <label>16.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Pauls, R.N., Silva, W.A., Rooney, C.M., Siddighi, S., Kleeman, S.D., Dryfhout, V., <italic>et</italic><italic>al</italic>. (2007) Sexual Function after Vaginal Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Urinary Incontinence. <italic>American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology</italic>, 197, 622.e1-622.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.014 <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.014</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18060954</pub-id><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.014">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.014</ext-link></mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="journal">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Pauls, R.N.</string-name>
              <string-name>Silva, W.A.</string-name>
              <string-name>Rooney, C.M.</string-name>
              <string-name>Siddighi, S.</string-name>
              <string-name>Kleeman, S.D.</string-name>
              <string-name>Dryfhout, V.</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2007</year>
            <article-title>Sexual Function after Vaginal Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Urinary Incontinence</article-title>
            <source>American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology</source>
            <volume>197</volume>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.014</pub-id>
            <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18060954</pub-id>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B17">
        <label>17.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="other">Esho, T. (2012) An Exploration of the Psycho-Sexual Experiences of Women Who Have Undergone Female Genital Cutting: A Case of the Maasai in Kenya. <italic>Facts</italic>, <italic>Views and Vision in ObGyn</italic>, 4, 121-132.</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="other">
            <person-group person-group-type="author">
              <string-name>Esho, T.</string-name>
              <string-name>Facts, V</string-name>
            </person-group>
            <year>2012</year>
            <article-title>An Exploration of the Psycho-Sexual Experiences of Women Who Have Undergone Female Genital Cutting: A Case of the Maasai in Kenya</article-title>
            <source>Facts</source>
            <volume>4</volume>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B18">
        <label>18.</label>
        <citation-alternatives>
          <mixed-citation publication-type="web">Female Sexual Dysfunction. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-bulletin/articles/2019/07/female-sexual-dysfunction</mixed-citation>
          <element-citation publication-type="web">
            <year>2019</year>
          </element-citation>
        </citation-alternatives>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>