Hematoma following gender-affirming mastectomy: A systematic review of the evidence

Breast Reduction Epidemiology and Complications in Nonbinary, Transgender, and Cisgender Adults

INTRODUCTION

Research in gender-affirming chest surgery has primarily compared cisgender versus transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) people, without specifically addressing nonbinary people. This study will assess surgical complications between cisgender, transgender, and nonbinary adults undergoing breast reductions.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program databases from 2015 to 2021 were used to identify TGD patients who underwent breast reduction (Current Procedural Terminology code: 19318) and cisgender patients who underwent this procedure for cosmesis or cancer prophylaxis. Analysis of variance tests, chi-squared tests, unpaired t-tests, and regression models compared complications among cisgender, transgender, and nonbinary patients.

RESULTS

A total of 1222 patients met the inclusion criteria: 380 (31.1%) were cisgender, 769 (62.9%) were transgender, and 73 (6.0%) were nonbinary. The proportion of TGD patients grew significantly relative to cisgender patients over the study period (P < 0.001). The overall all-cause complication rate was 3.4%, with 4.2% of cisgender, 1.4% of nonbinary, and 3.1% of transgender patients experiencing surgical complications. After adjusting for confounding variables, no statistically significant difference was observed in all-cause complication rates between the cohorts. In the sample, 19 transgender patients (2.5%) underwent reoperation. Transgender patients had a lower likelihood of wound complications (odds ratio: 0.172; 95% confidence interval: 0.035-0.849; P = 0.031) compared to cisgender patients and nonbinary patients. None of the patients experienced a severe systemic complication.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings emphasize the growing demand and safety of gender-affirming breast reductions. They underscore the importance of continued research and tailored approaches to delivering care to nonbinary and transgender patients, addressing their diverse needs and improving access to gender-affirming surgeries.

Gender-affirming surgeries for transgender and gender diverse individuals and associated health outcomes

Gender-affirming care is treatment that recognizes and affirms the gender identity of transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals. Though not all TGD people choose to surgically transition, gender-affirming surgeries (GAS) are an important part of many TGD people's transition. GAS can include a wide array of procedures aimed at aligning an individual's physical characteristics and gender identity. This review describes the most common procedures considered to be GAS, detailing important relevant considerations for each procedure. These include transfeminine procedures (i.e., breast augmentation, penile inversion vaginoplasty, orchiectomy, tracheal shave, and facial feminization); transmasculine procedures (i.e., chest masculinization, hysterectomy, phalloplasty, and metoidioplasty); and other procedures (i.e., fertility preservation and hair removal). Patient outcomes and the legal landscape for GAS are also discussed to contextualize these procedures within largest discourses surrounding gender-affirming care.

Use of Tranexamic Acid in Gender-Affirming Mastectomy Reduces Rates of Postoperative Hematoma and Seroma

BACKGROUND

The established safety and efficacy of tranexamic acid (TXA) in minimizing perioperative blood loss has led to increased interest within plastic surgery. Prior studies have demonstrated decreased edema and ecchymosis and reduced rates of postoperative collection with administration of TXA; however, its use has not been reported in gender-affirming mastectomy. This represents the first study to evaluate the effects of TXA on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy.

METHODS

A single-center cohort study was performed analyzing all consecutive patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy with the senior author (R.B.-L.) between February of 2017 and October of 2022. Beginning in June of 2021, all patients received 1000 mg of TXA intravenously before incision and 1000 mg at the conclusion of the procedure. Patients were stratified according to intraoperative administration of TXA, with demographic characteristics, surgical characteristics, and postoperative outcomes compared between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 851 patients underwent gender-affirming mastectomy. Of these, 646 cases were performed without TXA, and 205 patients received intravenous TXA intraoperatively, as described previously. Patients who received TXA had significantly lower rates of seroma (20.5% versus 33.0%; P < 0.001) and hematoma (0.5% versus 5.7%; P = 0.002). There was no difference in rates of surgical-site infection ( P = 0.74). TXA use was not associated with increased rates of venous thromboembolism ( P = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative administration of TXA in patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy may safely reduce the risk of postoperative seroma and hematoma without increased risk of thromboembolic events. Additional data collection and prospective studies are warranted to corroborate these findings.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Patterns of Perioperative Hormone Therapy for Gender-Affirming Surgery

INTRODUCTION

There is no consensus regarding perioperative hormone replacement therapy (HRT) for gender-affirming surgery (GAS). Common concerns for continuing perioperative HRT included risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or hematoma. However, discontinuing HRT is not risk free and may cause mood swing or increased anxiety. Our study aimed to investigate current patterns of HRT before GAS worldwide.

METHODS

The first stage of Delphi technique was implemented by sending a 27-item survey to all surgeons (total n = 150; 94 plastic surgeon, 35 urologist, and 21 gynecologists) of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health who perform GAS. Survey themes included the hormone type, duration, and usage of DVT prophylaxis.

RESULTS

Overall survey response rate was 34% (total n = 51; 8 urologists, 35 plastic surgeons, and 8 gynecologists). The majority of surgeons are US-based (n = 39, 76%). The most common HRTs are in injection form (n = 28, 55%). The majority of surgeons do not stop HRT before GAS and do provide DVT prophylaxis to all patients <1 week after GAS. The most common procedure that surgeons discontinue HRT is feminizing bottom surgery (43%). For surgeons who discontinue HRT before GAS, there is a wide variation on discontinuation schedule.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variation in perioperative HRT patterns for GAS. Further research is needed to develop a data-driven consensus guideline to provide high quality of care for transgender and nonbinary patients.