Background Obesity can often be a barrier to gender-affirming top surgery in transmasculine patients because of concern for increased surgical site complications. Study Design All adult patients (N = 948) within an integrated health care system who underwent gender-affirming mastectomy from 2013 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate the relationship between obesity and surgical site complications or revisions. Results One third of patients (n = 295) had obese body mass index (BMI), and those patients were further stratified into obesity class I (BMI of 30–34.9 kg/m2, 9.4%), class II (BMI of 35–39.9 kg/m2, 8.9%), and class III (BMI of ≥40 kg/m2, 2.9%). A majority of patients across BMI categories underwent double incision surgery. There were no significant differences in complications or revisions between patients with obesity versus those with normal BMI, when BMI was treated as a categorical or continuous variable and when evaluating only patients who underwent double incision surgery. Conclusions Obesity alone should not be considered a contraindication for gender-affirming mastectomy. Attention should be given to several modifiable risk factors identified in this study, including lesser incision surgical techniques, tobacco use, and testosterone use. Further research is needed to understand risks associated with the highest BMI (≥40 kg/m2) patients and to assess patient satisfaction with surgical outcome.

Ten patients with gliomas were treated between 1977 and 1993. Three of the lesions (30 percent) exhibited intracranial extension. Fifty percent (2 of 4) of the intranasal lesions exhibited intracranial extension. Effective removal of the lesion required manipulation of nasal bones in intranasal lesions and extranasal lesions with intranasal extension. Gliomas with an intracranial component were best addressed through a combined intracranial and extracranial approach.

Background Increasingly more nonbinary patients are obtaining better access for gender-affirming chest surgery (top surgery), representing an important subset of patients who undergo such surgery. Objective We review our experience at gender-affirming chest surgery in nonbinary versus transmasculine patients in an integrated health care setting. Methods We performed a retrospective study of nonbinary and transmasculine patients who underwent gender-affirming chest surgery from May 1, 2012, to December 27, 2017. Results There were 111 nonbinary patients and 665 transmasculine patients included in the final analyses. Nonbinary patients were more likely to seek more than 1 surgical consultations than transmasculine patients (24.3% vs 1.7%, respectively, P < 0.0001). More nonbinary patients (17.3%) indicated nipple sensation to be important relative to their transmasculine counterparts (0.4%, P < 0.0001). Fewer nonbinary patients were on testosterone before surgery (33.64%) in comparison to transmasculine patients (86.14%, P < 0.0001). When only prior reduction mammaplasty or top surgery were considered, nonbinary patients (8.1%) were more likely than transmasculine patients (3.5%) to have had a prior chest surgery. When evaluating patients who did not have prior chest surgery before undergoing top surgery at our institution (n = 721), rates of major complications, minor complications, as well as revisions, were comparable between nonbinary and transmasculine patients. Conclusions This study demonstrated that more nonbinary patients requested nonflat chests relative to their transmasculine counterparts. Both groups in our sample displayed comparable rates of complications after top surgery.

No abstract

No abstract

Resurfacing the skin to improve skin quality is an important concept in aesthetic plastic surgery. Although time-honored methods (e.g., dermabrasion and chemical peel)

Background Little has been published about transmasculine and nonbinary gender-affirming mastectomies, particularly for patients with skin excess who desire reliable vascularity and sensation to the nipple-areolar complex. In this case series, we describe our experiences with the “buttonhole technique.” Methods This was a retrospective case series of all consecutive patients who had a buttonhole mastectomy by a single surgeon. This technique maintains the nipple-areolar complex on a dermal pedicle rather than using a free nipple graft. Results Seventeen patients were included, with ages ranging from 21 to 49 years (median, 28 years). There were no major complications. Four patients had minor complications and/or required revision. Conclusions The buttonhole technique should be considered for transmasculine and nonbinary patients with skin excess who are concerned about nipple vascularity and sensation.

No abstract