Aesthetic Refinements after Radial Free Flap Phalloplasty: Optimizing the Donor Site and the Phallus

A systematic review and meta-analysis of urethral complications and outcomes in transgender men

BACKGROUND

Urologic problems, such as urethral fistulas and strictures, are among the most frequent complications occurring after phalloplasty. Although many studies have reported successful phalloplasty and urethral reconstruction with reliable outcomes in transgender men, no method has become standardized so far. This study aimed to summarize the results of reports on urological complications and outcomes in transgender men with respect to various types of urethral reconstruction.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases was conducted for studies related to phalloplasty in transsexuals. Data on various phallic urethral techniques, urethral complications, and outcomes were collected and analyzed using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies (1,566 patients) were included: eight studies (1,061 patients) on "tube-in-tube," nine studies (273 patients) on "prelaminated flap," and six studies (221 patients) on "second flap." Compared with the tube-in-tube technique, the prelaminated flap was associated with a significantly higher urethral stricture/stenosis rate; however, there was no difference between the prelaminated flap and the second flap techniques. For all phalloplasty patients, the pool rate of urethral fistula or stenosis is 48.9%, the rate of the ability to void while standing is 91.5%, occurrence rate of tactile or erogenous sensation is 88%, the prosthesis complication rate is 27.9%, and patient-reported satisfactory outcome rate is 90.5%.

CONCLUSION

Urethral reconstruction with a prelaminated flap was associated with a significantly higher urethral stricture rate and increased need of revision surgery compared with that observed using a skin flap. Overall, most patients were able to void while standing and were satisfied with the outcomes.

Narrative review of penile prosthetic implant technology and surgical results, including transgender patients

Over the past 40 years, the technological and surgical advancements in penile prostheses have led to increased patient satisfaction rates and decreased complication and infection rates. In cis males with erectile dysfunction (ED), these technological improvements tremendously improve quality of life. In female to male transgender patients, prostheses provide the ability to engage in penetrative intercourse and to urinate standing. This review evaluates technological and surgical advancements in penile prosthetics in the context of documented patient satisfaction and complication rates from prosthesis surgeries. Retrospective studies of penile implant usage in female to male gender-affirming surgeries report that infection and complication rates are higher than those seen in cis males. There are newer prostheses developed specifically for female to male reassignment surgeries, but outcome data is limited. Continued research and development are needed to develop more efficacious penile implantation options for gender affirmation surgery.

Transgender patients: considerations for routine gynecologic care and cancer screening

In the last several years, demand for transgender care from gynecologists has increased significantly. Transgender people comprise a diverse group who do not identify with the sex they were assigned at birth. Worldwide, it is estimated that 25 million people identify as transgender. Some undergo hormonal and/or surgical treatment aiming to feminize or masculinize their bodies. Cross-sex hormone treatment for transgender women-individuals assigned as male at birth who identify themselves as women-includes exogenous estrogen and/or progestin administration in combination with anti-androgens, whereas testosterone is used for transgender men-individuals whose natal sex is women but identify themselves as men. Although it is usually rare, hormone-sensitive malignancies may arise, and long-term effects remain unknown. In addition, reconstructive surgeries may include breast augmentation and vaginoplasty (creation of a vagina) for transgender women, and chest masculinization surgery (bilateral mastectomy) and metoidioplasty (lengthening of the clitoris to create a microphallus) or phalloplasty (creation of a phallus) for transgender men. Evidence relating to breast and reproductive tract cancers in the trans population is limited and insufficient to estimate cancer prevalence, and recommendations for screening and preventive care depend on the patients' hormonal and surgical status. Even less information exists regarding the sub-set of individuals with genetic predisposition for these malignancies. In this review, we aimed to summarize current recommendations for gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists regarding cancer screening and personalized cancer-risk assessment in transgender people.

Piloting a Genital Affirmation Surgical Priorities Scale for Trans Masculine Patients

Purpose: Many transgender men seek surgical interventions to create male genitalia. Currently, there is no standardized tool to assess individual goals and expectations for such reconstructive genital surgery. The purpose of this study was to develop and pilot a genital affirmation surgical priorities scale (GASPS) in transgender men seeking metoidioplasty and/or phalloplasty. Methods: The research team developed the GASPS and piloted it with 63 patients seeking reconstructive genital surgery. The scale was constructed after a comprehensive literature review identified key areas of importance, including size, erogenous and tactile sensation, interest in penetrative sex, ability to urinate standing up, and maintenance of orgasmic function. Results were then tabulated and analyzed to look for trends. Results: Sixty three consecutive patients, mean age 24.98 years (standard deviation [SD]=5.87), were administered the assessment. On the 5 point Likert scale, patients were most concerned about being able to stand to urinate (mean=4.38, SD=1.06) and erotic sensation (mean=4.21, SD=0.8). The ability to engage in penetrative intercourse (mean=3.98, SD=1.34), tactile sensation (mean=3.93, SD=1.01), and penis length (mean=3.37, SD=1.18), and girth (mean=3.09, SD=1.20) were not universally considered to be important and responses varied widely. Most patients (86%) stated they had a history of being able to orgasm, and 8% did not know. Feedback suggested that scale use helped patients clarify goals for surgery. Conclusion: GASPS use confirmed the diversity of patient priorities and the importance of individualized goal assessment. It also confirmed previous reports that standing to urinate is a major genital affirmation motivation for many transgender men.