The different studies did systematically agree on the existence of the G-spot, but there was no agreement on its location, size, or nature

Vieira-Baptista P, Lima-Silva J, Preti M, et al. G-spot: Fact or Fiction?: A Systematic Review. Sex Med 2021;9:100435. Oct 2021. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S205011612100115X

Introduction: The G-spot, a putative erogenous area in the anterior vaginal wall, is a widely accepted concept in the mainstream media, but controversial in medical literature.

Aim: Review of the scientific data concerning the existence, location, and size of the G-spot.

Methods: Search on Pubmed, Pubmed Central, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov and Google Scholar from inception to November 2020 of studies on G-spot's existence, location and nature. Surveys, clinical, physiological, imaging, histological and anatomic studies were included.

Main Outcome Measure: Existence, location, and nature of the G-spot.

Results: In total, 31 eligible studies were identified: 6 surveys, 5 clinical, 1 neurophysiological, 9 imaging, 8 histological/anatomical, and 2 combined clinical and histological. Most women (62.9%) reported having a G-spot and it was identified in most clinical studies (55.4% of women); in 2 studies it was not identified in any women. Imaging studies had contradictory results in terms of its existence and nature. Some showed a descending of the anterior vaginal wall, that led to the concept of clitourethrovaginal complex. In anatomic studies, one author could systematically identify the G-spot, while another group did not find it. Studies on innervation of the vaginal walls did not systematically identify an area with richer innervation.

Conclusion The different studies did systematically agree on the existence of the G-spot. Among the studies in which it was considered to exist, there was no agreement on its location, size, or nature. The existence of this structure remains unproved.

Key Words: G-spotGräfenberg SpotOrgasmSexual FunctionClitorurethrovaginal Complex