Background: Vaginoplasty is a gender-affirming procedure for transgender and gender diverse (TGD) patients who experience gender incongruence. This procedure reduces mental health concerns and enhances patients' quality of life. A systematic review investigating the sexual health outcomes of vaginoplasty has not been performed. Objectives:To investigate sexual health after gender-affirming vaginoplasty for TGD patients.
Background: Gender-affirming mastectomy has become one of the most frequently performed procedures for transgender and nonbinary patients. Although there are a variety of potential surgical approaches available, the impact of technique on outcomes remains unclear. Here we present our experience performing periareolar and double incision mastectomies, with a focus on comparing patient demographics, preoperative risk factors, and surgical outcomes and complication rates between techniques. Methods: Retrospective review identified patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy by the senior author between 2017 and 2020. Patients were stratified according to surgical technique, with demographics and postoperative outcomes compared between groups. Results: In total, 490 patients underwent gender-affirming mastectomy during the study period. An estimated 96 patients underwent periareolar mastectomy, whereas 390 underwent double incision mastectomy. Demographics were similar between groups, and there were no differences in rates of hematoma (3.1% versus 5.6%, respectively; P = 0.90), seroma (33.3% versus 36.4%; P = 0.52), or revision procedures (14.6% versus 15.8% P = 0.84) based on technique. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate no difference in the rates of postoperative complications or revision procedures based on surgical technique. These results also suggest that with an experienced surgeon and proper patient selection, both techniques of gender-affirming mastectomy can be performed safely and with comparable outcomes.
Background: Gender-affirming mastectomy, or “top surgery,” has become one of the most frequently performed procedures for transgender and nonbinary patients. However, management of perioperative testosterone therapy remains controversial. Despite a lack of supporting evidence, many surgeons require cessation of testosterone before top surgery. This is the first study to compare complication rates in patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy with and without discontinuation of perioperative testosterone. Methods: This retrospective review included patients undergoing top surgery by the senior author between 2017 and 2020. Reflecting a change in the senior author’s practice, before May of 2019, all patients were required to discontinue testosterone before surgery; all patients treated after this point continued their testosterone regimens throughout the perioperative period. Patients were stratified according to testosterone regimen and perioperative hormone management, with demographic characteristics and postoperative outcomes compared among groups. Results: A total of 490 patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy during the study period were included. Testosterone was held perioperatively in 175 patients and continued in 211 patients; 104 patients never received testosterone therapy. Demographic characteristics were similar among groups and there was no difference in rates of hematoma (2.9% versus 2.8% versus 2.9%, respectively; P = 0.99), seroma (1.1% versus 0% versus 1%, respectively; P = 0.31), venous thromboembolism (0% versus 0.5% versus 0%, respectively; P = 0.99), or overall complications (6.9% versus 4.3% versus 5.8%, respectively; P = 0.54). Conclusions: Our results demonstrate no difference in postoperative complication rates among groups. Whereas further investigation is warranted, our data suggest that routine cessation of testosterone in the perioperative period is not necessary for patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.