Background: A rare, but consequential, risk of gender affirming surgery (GAS) is post-operative regret resulting in a request for surgical reversal. Studies on regret and surgical reversal are scarce, and there is no standard terminology regarding either etiology and/or classification of the various forms of regret.This study includes a survey of surgeons' experience with patient regret and requests for reversal surgery, a literature review on the topic of regret, and expert, consensus opinion designed to establish a classification system for the etiology and types of regret experienced by some patients.Methods: This anonymous survey was sent to the 154 surgeons who registered for the 2016 World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) conference and the 2017 USPATH conference.Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. A MeSH search of the gender-affirming outcomes literature was performed on PubMed for relevant studies pertaining to regret. Original research and review studies that were thought to discuss regret were included for full text review.
Results:The literature is inconsistent regarding etiology and classification of regret following GAS. Of the 154 surgeons queried, 30% responded to our survey. Cumulatively, these respondents treated between 18,125 and 27,325 individuals. Fifty-seven percent of surgeons encountered at least one patient who expressed regret, with a total of 62 patients expressing regret (0.2-0.3%). Etiologies of regret were varied and classified as either:(I) true gender-related regret (42%), (II) social regret (37%), and (III) medical regret (8%). The surgeons' experience with patient regret and request for reversal was consistent with the existing literature.Conclusions: In this study, regret following GAS was rare and was consistent with the existing literature.Regret can be classified as true gender-related regret, social regret and medical regret resulting from complications, function, pre-intervention decision making. Guidelines in transgender health should offer preventive strategies as well as treatment recommendations, should a patient experience regret. Future studies and scientific discourse are encouraged on this important topic.
Background: The published literature on education about transgender health within health professions curricula was previously found to be sporadic and fragmented. Recently, more inclusive and holistic approaches have been adopted. We summarize advances in transgender health education. Methods: A 5-stage scoping review framework was followed, including a literature search for articles relevant to transgender health care interventions in 5 databases (Education Source, LGBT Source, MedEd Portal, PsycInfo, PubMed) from January 2017 to September 2019. Search results were screened to include original articles reporting outcomes of educational interventions with a transgender health component that included MD/DO students in the United States and Canada. A gray literature search identified continuing medical education (CME) courses from 12 health professional associations with significant transgender-related content. Results: Our literature search identified 966 unique publications published in the 2 years since our prior review, of which 10 met inclusion criteria. Novel educational formats included interdisciplinary interventions, post-residency training including CME courses, and online web modules, all of which were effective in improving competencies related to transgender health care. Gray literature search resulted 15 CME courses with learning objectives appropriate to the 7 professional organizations who published them. Conclusions: Current transgender health curricula include an expanding variety of educational intervention formats driven by their respective educational context, learning objectives, and placement in the health professional curriculum. Notable limitations include paucity of objective educational intervention outcomes measurements, absence of long-term follow-up data, and varied nature of intervention types. A clear best practice for transgender curricular development has not yet been identified in the literature.
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.
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.