Evaluation of Life Improvement in Trans Men After Mastectomy: A Prospective Study Using the TRANS-Q

Ultrasound-Assisted Liposuction for Top Surgery in Transgender Men: Clinical Experience and Evaluation of Satisfaction and Quality of Life with TRANS-Q and BREAST-Q

BACKGROUND

During the last decade, the demand for top surgery in female-to-male transgender (FMT) has increased worldwide. This study aims to present our initial experience with the novel use of ultrasound-assisted liposuction (UAL) in top surgery. Additionally, we evaluate the satisfaction and quality of life with TRANS-Q and BREAST-Q.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study analyzing FMT undergoing UAL in top surgery from 2019 to 2021 at a single institution. We analyzed demographic variables, comorbidities, surgical techniques, operative time, complications, and follow-up time. We used TRANS-Q and BREAST-Q to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

We performed 34 UAL combined subcutaneous mastectomies in 17 patients. Twelve patients (70.6%) underwent mastectomy double incision with free nipple grafting (DIFNG), and 29.4% underwent concentric circular mastectomy. In the DIFNG group, BMI (p < 0.02), the weight of each mammary gland (p < 0.001), and use of chest binder (p < 0.03) were significantly higher. The mean operative time was 115 min. The complication rate was 11.7% (one hematoma and three hypertrophic scars). The mean follow-up was 29.4 months, and no aesthetic revision surgeries was reported. The response rate for TRANS-Q and BREAST-Q was 76.5%, and high satisfaction with the results and significant improvement in quality of life were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the first cohort of transgender men who underwent UAL in top surgery. With proper training, the use of UAL could be a feasible and safe technique, offering good long-term esthetic results. Additionally, TRANS-Q and BREAST-Q demonstrated improved satisfaction and quality of life.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Gender-Affirming Surgery in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

Objectives: Fewer than one-fifth of all studies on gender-affirming care originate from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This is the first systematic review to examine surgical demographics and outcomes following gender-affirming surgery (GAS) in LMICs. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, five databases were systematically searched for original studies and case series on GAS within LMIC settings. Excluded reports included animal studies, non-English language studies, secondary studies including reviews, individual case reports and conference abstracts. Results: This review includes 34 studies involving n = 5064 TGNB individuals. Most studies (22, 64.7%) were from upper-middle-income countries, followed by lower-middle-income countries (12, 35.3%). A total of 31 studies (91.2%) reported on post-operative outcomes. Of n = 5013 patients who underwent GAS, 71.5% (n = 3584) underwent masculinizing and 29.5% (n = 1480) underwent feminizing procedures. The predominant procedures were metoidioplasty (n = 2270/3584, 63.3%) and vaginoplasty (n = 1103/1480, 74.5%). Mean follow-up was 47.7 months. In patients who underwent metoidioplasty, 6.8% (n = 155) of patients experienced a complication and 6.3% (n = 144) underwent revision surgery. In patients who underwent vaginoplasty, 11.5% (n = 127) of patients experienced a complication and 8.5% (n = 94) underwent revision surgery. Of the studies (25/34, 73.5%) that reported on quality of life and post-operative satisfaction, the majority showed marked improvements in psychosocial and functional outcomes. Notably, no post-surgical regret was reported among the surveyed patients. Conclusions: Existing literature on GAS in LMICs remains scarce and is concentrated in select institutions that drive specific procedures. Our review highlights the low reported volumes of GAS, variability in surgical outcomes and quality of life.

Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Gender-Affirming Care Worldwide: A Systematic Review

Importance

Gender-affirming care is a key clinical area that can benefit from implementation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Identifying barriers to and enablers of PROM implementation is needed to develop an evidence-based implementation strategy.

Objective

To identify (1) PROMs previously implemented for gender-affirming care and constructs measured, (2) how patients completed PROMs and how results were reported and used, and (3) barriers to and enablers of PROM implementation.

Evidence Review

In this systematic review, PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched from inception to October 25, 2021, and updated on December 16, 2022. Gray literature was searched through gray literature database, online search engine, and targeted website searching. Inclusion criteria were (1) original articles of (2) a formally developed PROM or ad hoc instrument administered for gender-affirming care to (3) patients accessing gender-affirming care. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool was used to evaluate quality of included studies. This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021233080).

Findings

In total, 286 studies were included, representing 85 395 transgender and nonbinary patients from more than 30 countries. A total of 205 different PROMs were used in gender-affirming care. No studies described using an implementation science theory, model, or framework to support PROM deployment. Key barriers to PROM implementation included issues with evidence strength and quality of the PROM, engaging participants, and PROM complexity. Key enablers of PROM implementation included using PROMs validated for gender-affirming care, implementing PROMs able to be deployed online or in person, implementing PROMs that are shorter and reduce patient burden, engaging key stakeholders and participants as part of developing an implementation plan, and organizational climate.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review of barriers to and enablers of PROM implementation in gender-affirming care, PROM implementation was inconsistent and did not follow evidence-based approaches in implementation science. There was also a lack of patient input in creating implementation strategies, suggesting a need for patient-centered approaches to PROM implementation. Frameworks created from these results can be used to develop evidence-based PROM implementation initiatives for gender-affirming care and have potential generalizability for other clinical areas interested in implementing PROMs.