Cole V Roblee, Rebecca Arteaga, Iulianna Taritsa, Mona Ascha, Joshua P Weissman, Paige Hackenberger, Megan Perez, Marco Ellis, Sumanas W Jordan
{"title":"性别确认胸部手术后的患者报告和临床结果:二元和非二元跨男性个体的比较。","authors":"Cole V Roblee, Rebecca Arteaga, Iulianna Taritsa, Mona Ascha, Joshua P Weissman, Paige Hackenberger, Megan Perez, Marco Ellis, Sumanas W Jordan","doi":"10.1097/GOX.0000000000006297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nonbinary individuals assigned female at birth are increasingly presenting for gender-affirming chest surgery (GCS). However, little is known about psychosocial outcomes in this group. We compare patient-reported and clinical outcomes after GCS between nonbinary and binary transmasculine individuals who underwent GCS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed an institutional retrospective chart review. Demographic information, medical comorbidities, history of gender-affirming medical care, operative details, and complications were collected and compared between nonbinary and binary patients. Two validated patient-reported outcomes measures, the Gender Congruence and Life Satisfaction (GCLS) scale and the chest dysphoria measure were administered postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 281 patients were included, of which 40.6% (114) identified as nonbinary and 59.4% (167) identified as binary transgender men. Fewer nonbinary patients used testosterone (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Nonbinary patients underwent a wider variety of masculinizing chest operations than binary patients, with fewer nonbinary patients electing for free nipple-areolar complex grafts (<i>P</i> < 0.001) and more nonbinary patients undergoing breast reduction (<i>P</i> = 0.001). A total of 137 (48.7%) patients responded to postoperative surveys. Nonbinary and binary respondents had comparable scores on the overall GCLS (<i>P</i> = 0.86), GCLS chest subscale (<i>P</i> = 0.38), and chest dysphoria measure (<i>P</i> = 0.40). The absence of nipple-areolar complex grafts was associated with higher GCLS chest scores (<i>P</i> = 0.004).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nonbinary individuals have similarly positive outcomes following GCS compared with binary individuals. Surgeons should be aware of greater medical and surgical heterogeneity in this population and seek to understand individual patients' goals and priorities.</p>","PeriodicalId":20149,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","volume":"12 11","pages":"e6297"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554349/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient-reported and Clinical Outcomes following Gender-affirming Chest Surgery: A Comparison of Binary and Nonbinary Transmasculine Individuals.\",\"authors\":\"Cole V Roblee, Rebecca Arteaga, Iulianna Taritsa, Mona Ascha, Joshua P Weissman, Paige Hackenberger, Megan Perez, Marco Ellis, Sumanas W Jordan\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/GOX.0000000000006297\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nonbinary individuals assigned female at birth are increasingly presenting for gender-affirming chest surgery (GCS). However, little is known about psychosocial outcomes in this group. We compare patient-reported and clinical outcomes after GCS between nonbinary and binary transmasculine individuals who underwent GCS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed an institutional retrospective chart review. Demographic information, medical comorbidities, history of gender-affirming medical care, operative details, and complications were collected and compared between nonbinary and binary patients. Two validated patient-reported outcomes measures, the Gender Congruence and Life Satisfaction (GCLS) scale and the chest dysphoria measure were administered postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 281 patients were included, of which 40.6% (114) identified as nonbinary and 59.4% (167) identified as binary transgender men. Fewer nonbinary patients used testosterone (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Nonbinary patients underwent a wider variety of masculinizing chest operations than binary patients, with fewer nonbinary patients electing for free nipple-areolar complex grafts (<i>P</i> < 0.001) and more nonbinary patients undergoing breast reduction (<i>P</i> = 0.001). A total of 137 (48.7%) patients responded to postoperative surveys. Nonbinary and binary respondents had comparable scores on the overall GCLS (<i>P</i> = 0.86), GCLS chest subscale (<i>P</i> = 0.38), and chest dysphoria measure (<i>P</i> = 0.40). The absence of nipple-areolar complex grafts was associated with higher GCLS chest scores (<i>P</i> = 0.004).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nonbinary individuals have similarly positive outcomes following GCS compared with binary individuals. Surgeons should be aware of greater medical and surgical heterogeneity in this population and seek to understand individual patients' goals and priorities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open\",\"volume\":\"12 11\",\"pages\":\"e6297\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554349/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000006297\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000006297","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Patient-reported and Clinical Outcomes following Gender-affirming Chest Surgery: A Comparison of Binary and Nonbinary Transmasculine Individuals.
Background: Nonbinary individuals assigned female at birth are increasingly presenting for gender-affirming chest surgery (GCS). However, little is known about psychosocial outcomes in this group. We compare patient-reported and clinical outcomes after GCS between nonbinary and binary transmasculine individuals who underwent GCS.
Methods: We performed an institutional retrospective chart review. Demographic information, medical comorbidities, history of gender-affirming medical care, operative details, and complications were collected and compared between nonbinary and binary patients. Two validated patient-reported outcomes measures, the Gender Congruence and Life Satisfaction (GCLS) scale and the chest dysphoria measure were administered postoperatively.
Results: A total of 281 patients were included, of which 40.6% (114) identified as nonbinary and 59.4% (167) identified as binary transgender men. Fewer nonbinary patients used testosterone (P < 0.001). Nonbinary patients underwent a wider variety of masculinizing chest operations than binary patients, with fewer nonbinary patients electing for free nipple-areolar complex grafts (P < 0.001) and more nonbinary patients undergoing breast reduction (P = 0.001). A total of 137 (48.7%) patients responded to postoperative surveys. Nonbinary and binary respondents had comparable scores on the overall GCLS (P = 0.86), GCLS chest subscale (P = 0.38), and chest dysphoria measure (P = 0.40). The absence of nipple-areolar complex grafts was associated with higher GCLS chest scores (P = 0.004).
Conclusions: Nonbinary individuals have similarly positive outcomes following GCS compared with binary individuals. Surgeons should be aware of greater medical and surgical heterogeneity in this population and seek to understand individual patients' goals and priorities.
期刊介绍:
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open is an open access, peer reviewed, international journal focusing on global plastic and reconstructive surgery.Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open publishes on all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including basic science/experimental studies pertinent to the field and also clinical articles on such topics as: breast reconstruction, head and neck surgery, pediatric and craniofacial surgery, hand and microsurgery, wound healing, and cosmetic and aesthetic surgery. Clinical studies, experimental articles, ideas and innovations, and techniques and case reports are all welcome article types. Manuscript submission is open to all surgeons, researchers, and other health care providers world-wide who wish to communicate their research results on topics related to plastic and reconstructive surgery. Furthermore, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open, a complimentary journal to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, provides an open access venue for the publication of those research studies sponsored by private and public funding agencies that require open access publication of study results. Its mission is to disseminate high quality, peer reviewed research in plastic and reconstructive surgery to the widest possible global audience, through an open access platform. As an open access journal, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open offers its content for free to any viewer. Authors of articles retain their copyright to the materials published. Additionally, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open provides rapid review and publication of accepted papers.