MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377233925 · doi:10.1093/jsxmed/qdad060.001

(001) How many Nerve Fibers Innervate the Human Clitoris? A Histomorphometric Evaluation of the Dorsal Nerve of the Clitoris

2023· article· en· W4377233925 on OpenAlexaffabout
Blair R. Peters, M Uloko, P Isabey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClitorisPudendal nerveAnatomyPhalloplastyMedicinePenis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction It is frequently quoted in mainstream media that the clitoris has “8000 nerve endings”. However, no study has yet quantified the number of nerve fibers (axons) innervating the human clitoris. The dorsal nerve of the clitoris (DNC) is the primary source of somatic clitoral innervation. Reporting the number of axons in the DNC is an important step in our understanding of clitoral innervation and sexual response with implications for many fields of medical practice. Reconstruction following iatrogenic injuries to the dorsal clitoral nerve and restoration following cases of genital mutilation will benefit from a better understanding of the DNC. This knowledge will also be an important factor contributing to the optimization of nerve selection and sensory outcomes in gender-affirming genital surgery. Objective The purpose of this study is to quantify the number of nerve fibers in the human dorsal nerve of the clitoris (DNC) and report the approximate number of nerve fibers that innervate the human clitoris. Methods Following institutional approval and informed consent, dorsal clitoral nerve samples were obtained from 7 transmasculine patients undergoing gender-affirming phalloplasty surgery. In phalloplasty one of the two dorsal clitoral nerves is used to coapt to a sensory nerve in the phallus in order to provide for erogenous phallic sensation. At the time of nerve coaptation, a small excess of dorsal clitoral nerve (5 mm) was collected for analysis at the proximal level of the clitoral body, just after appearance of the dorsal clitoral nerve from underneath the pubic symphysis. The samples were placed into 3% glutaraldehyde fixative, post-fixed in 1% osmium tetroxide and serially dehydrate in ethanol and toluene. They were then embedded in araldite, sectioned on ultramicrotome into 1 μm cross sections and counter-stained with 1% toluidine blue. Histomorphometric evaluation was performed at 1000x magnification using a Leitz Laborlux S microscope and image analysis software (Clemex Vision Professional, Longueuil, Quebec) in order to obtain a nerve fiber count from each dorsal clitoral nerve specimen. Descriptive statistics were performed to yield a mean and range of the number of nerve fibers in the DNC. Assuming anatomic symmetry between bilateral DNC, the total number of somatic nerve fibers innervating the human clitoris was obtained by doubling the mean count of the DNC. Results 7 samples of the DNC were collected. The mean number of nerve fibers in the human dorsal clitoral nerve was 5140 with a range of 4926 to 5543. The mean number of myelinated nerve fibers innervating the human clitoris was 10281 (range 9852 to 11086). Conclusions This study is the first to report the number of myelinated nerve fibers in the human dorsal clitoral nerve and approximate the number of nerve fibers innervating the human clitoris. Findings demonstrate high and consistent myelinated axon counts and density. When taking into account the presence of uncounted unmyelinated axons, it is clear that far more than 8000 fibers innervate the human clitoris. Disclosure No

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicFemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting IssuesFrench-language works237,207