面部女性化手术中面部人体测量学的考虑:系统回顾。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Antoinette T Nguyen, Jonathan I Leckenby, Clinton Morrison
{"title":"面部女性化手术中面部人体测量学的考虑:系统回顾。","authors":"Antoinette T Nguyen, Jonathan I Leckenby, Clinton Morrison","doi":"10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Facial feminization surgery (FFS) is a key component of gender-affirming care, yet the field has historically been shaped by Eurocentric esthetic norms, with limited consideration of racial and ethnic differences in facial structure and sociocultural perceptions of femininity.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically evaluate existing literature on racial and ethnic considerations in FFS, including disparities in access, craniofacial anthropometric variability, gender perception, and postoperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered with PROSPERO. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase (through March 2025) identified studies assessing racial and ethnic variations in FFS access, surgical outcomes, craniofacial anthropometry, and gender perception. Studies were evaluated for risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist, and the CASP Qualitative Checklist. A narrative synthesis was performed due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies comprising 778 patients were included. Findings highlighted significant racial disparities in procedural selection, with African American, Asian, and Hispanic patients being less likely to undergo cranioplasty or rhinoplasty. Anthropometric studies revealed racial differences in nasolabial angle, chin dimensions, and mandibular flare. Social perception studies indicated an implicit whitening of femininity in FFS esthetics. However, race was not a significant predictor of revision rates or postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a paucity of research on race and ethnicity in FFS. Future studies should integrate race-conscious surgical planning, assess long-term patient-reported outcomes, and address systemic barriers to equitable access.</p>","PeriodicalId":51100,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sexual Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1891-1901"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facial anthropometric considerations in facial feminization surgery: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Antoinette T Nguyen, Jonathan I Leckenby, Clinton Morrison\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf204\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Facial feminization surgery (FFS) is a key component of gender-affirming care, yet the field has historically been shaped by Eurocentric esthetic norms, with limited consideration of racial and ethnic differences in facial structure and sociocultural perceptions of femininity.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically evaluate existing literature on racial and ethnic considerations in FFS, including disparities in access, craniofacial anthropometric variability, gender perception, and postoperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered with PROSPERO. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase (through March 2025) identified studies assessing racial and ethnic variations in FFS access, surgical outcomes, craniofacial anthropometry, and gender perception. Studies were evaluated for risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist, and the CASP Qualitative Checklist. A narrative synthesis was performed due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies comprising 778 patients were included. Findings highlighted significant racial disparities in procedural selection, with African American, Asian, and Hispanic patients being less likely to undergo cranioplasty or rhinoplasty. Anthropometric studies revealed racial differences in nasolabial angle, chin dimensions, and mandibular flare. Social perception studies indicated an implicit whitening of femininity in FFS esthetics. However, race was not a significant predictor of revision rates or postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a paucity of research on race and ethnicity in FFS. Future studies should integrate race-conscious surgical planning, assess long-term patient-reported outcomes, and address systemic barriers to equitable access.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51100,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sexual Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1891-1901\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sexual Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf204\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sexual Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf204","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:面部女性化手术(FFS)是性别确认护理的关键组成部分,但该领域在历史上一直受到欧洲中心审美规范的影响,很少考虑面部结构和女性气质的种族和民族差异。目的:系统评价FFS中种族和民族因素的现有文献,包括获取差异、颅面人体测量变异性、性别感知和术后结果。方法:按照PRISMA 2020指南进行系统评价,并在PROSPERO注册。通过对PubMed、Scopus和Embase的全面检索(截至2025年3月),确定了评估FFS获取、手术结果、颅面人体测量和性别感知方面种族和民族差异的研究。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)、乔安娜布里格斯研究所(JBI)检查表和CASP定性检查表评估研究的偏倚风险。由于研究设计和结果测量的异质性,进行了叙事综合。结果:纳入9项研究,共778例患者。研究结果强调了在手术选择上的显著种族差异,非裔美国人、亚裔和西班牙裔患者不太可能接受颅骨或鼻整形手术。人体测量学研究揭示了不同种族在鼻唇角、下巴尺寸和下颌光斑上的差异。社会知觉研究表明,FFS美学中隐含着女性化的白化。然而,种族并不是翻修率或术后并发症的显著预测因子。结论:对农村农民的种族和民族特征研究较少。未来的研究应整合种族意识手术计划,评估长期患者报告的结果,并解决公平获取的系统性障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Facial anthropometric considerations in facial feminization surgery: a systematic review.

Background: Facial feminization surgery (FFS) is a key component of gender-affirming care, yet the field has historically been shaped by Eurocentric esthetic norms, with limited consideration of racial and ethnic differences in facial structure and sociocultural perceptions of femininity.

Objective: To systematically evaluate existing literature on racial and ethnic considerations in FFS, including disparities in access, craniofacial anthropometric variability, gender perception, and postoperative outcomes.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered with PROSPERO. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase (through March 2025) identified studies assessing racial and ethnic variations in FFS access, surgical outcomes, craniofacial anthropometry, and gender perception. Studies were evaluated for risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist, and the CASP Qualitative Checklist. A narrative synthesis was performed due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures.

Results: Nine studies comprising 778 patients were included. Findings highlighted significant racial disparities in procedural selection, with African American, Asian, and Hispanic patients being less likely to undergo cranioplasty or rhinoplasty. Anthropometric studies revealed racial differences in nasolabial angle, chin dimensions, and mandibular flare. Social perception studies indicated an implicit whitening of femininity in FFS esthetics. However, race was not a significant predictor of revision rates or postoperative complications.

Conclusion: There is a paucity of research on race and ethnicity in FFS. Future studies should integrate race-conscious surgical planning, assess long-term patient-reported outcomes, and address systemic barriers to equitable access.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Sexual Medicine
Journal of Sexual Medicine 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
826
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sexual Medicine publishes multidisciplinary basic science and clinical research to define and understand the scientific basis of male, female, and couples sexual function and dysfunction. As an official journal of the International Society for Sexual Medicine and the International Society for the Study of Women''s Sexual Health, it provides healthcare professionals in sexual medicine with essential educational content and promotes the exchange of scientific information generated from experimental and clinical research. The Journal of Sexual Medicine includes basic science and clinical research studies in the psychologic and biologic aspects of male, female, and couples sexual function and dysfunction, and highlights new observations and research, results with innovative treatments and all other topics relevant to clinical sexual medicine. The objective of The Journal of Sexual Medicine is to serve as an interdisciplinary forum to integrate the exchange among disciplines concerned with the whole field of human sexuality. The journal accomplishes this objective by publishing original articles, as well as other scientific and educational documents that support the mission of the International Society for Sexual Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信