Search

Background:. Sexual health is critical to overall health, yet sexual history taking is challenging. LGBTQ+ patients face additional barriers due to cis/heteronormativity from the medical system. We aimed to develop and pilot test a novel sexual history questionnaire called the Sexual Health Intake (SHI) form for patients of diverse genders and sexualities. Methods:. The SHI comprises four pictogram-based questions about sexual contact at the mouth, anus, vaginal canal, and penis. We enrolled 100 sexually active, English-speaking adults from a gender-affirming surgery clinic and urology clinic from November 2022 to April 2023. All surveys were completed in the office. Patients also answered five feedback questions and 15 questions from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Sexual Function and Satisfaction (PROMIS-SexFS) survey as a validated comparator. Results:. One hundred patients aged 19–86 years representing an array of racial/ethnic groups, gender identities, and sexuality completed the study. Forms of sexual contact varied widely and included all possible combinations asked by the SHI. Feedback questions were answered favorably in domains of clinical utility, inclusiveness of identity and anatomy, and comprehensiveness of forms of sexual behavior. The SHI captured more positive responses than PROMIS-SexFS in corresponding questions about specific types of sexual activity. The SHI also asks about forms of sexual contact that are not addressed by PROMIS-SexFS, such as penis-to-clitoris. Conclusions:. SHI is an inclusive, patient-directed tool to aid sexual history taking without cisnormative or heteronormative biases. The form was well received by a diverse group of participants and can be considered for use in the clinical setting.

Background:. Penile inversion vaginoplasty is the most common gender-affirming genital surgery performed around the world. Although individual centers have published their experiences, expert consensus is generally lacking. Methods:. Semistructured interviews were performed with 17 experienced gender surgeons representing a diverse mix of specialties, experience, and countries regarding their patient selection, preoperative management, vaginoplasty techniques, complication management, and postoperative protocols. Results:. There is significant consistency in practices across some aspects of vaginoplasty. However, key areas of clinical heterogeneity are also present and include use of extragenital tissue for vaginal canal/apex creation, creation of the clitoral hood and inner labia minora, elevation of the neoclitoral neurovascular bundle, and perioperative hormone management. Pathway length of stay is highly variable (1–9 days). Lastly, some surgeons are moving toward continuation or partial reduction of estrogen in the perioperative period instead of cessation. Conclusions:. With a broad study of surgeon practices, and encompassing most of the high-volume vaginoplasty centers in Europe and North America, we found key areas of practice variation that represent areas of priority for future research to address. Further multi-institutional and prospective studies that incorporate patient-reported outcomes are necessary to further our understanding of these procedures.

Abstract Transgender and non-binary (TGNB) individuals often experience gender dysphoria. TGNB individuals with gender dysphoria may undergo genital gender-affirming surgery including vaginoplasty, phalloplasty, or metoidioplasty so that their genitourinary anatomy is congruent with their experienced gender. Given decreasing social stigma and increasing coverage from private and public payers, there has been a rapid increase in genital gender-affirming surgery in the past few years. As the incidence of genital gender-affirming surgery increases, a concurrent increase in the development and utilization of patient reported outcome measurement tools is critical. To date, there is no systematic way to assess and measure patients’ perspectives on their surgeries nor is there a validated measure to capture patient reported outcomes for TGNB individuals undergoing genital gender-affirming surgery. Without a systematic way to assess and measure patients’ perspectives on their care, there may be fragmentation of care. This fragmentation may result in challenges to ensure patients’ goals are at the forefront of shared- decision making. As we aim to increase access to surgical care for TGNB individuals, it is important to ensure this care is patient-centered and high-quality. The development of patient-reported outcomes for patients undergoing genital gender-affirming surgery is the first step in ensuring high quality patient-centered care. Herein, we discuss the critical need for development of validated patient reported outcome measures for transgender and non-binary patients undergoing genital reconstruction. We also propose a model of patient-engaged patient reported outcome measure development.

Background:. Patient-reported outcomes regarding sexual health are lacking or have not been validated for transgender patients following vaginoplasty. The aim of this study is to further characterize the difference in sexual health, genital self-image, and the relationship between them for patients who were pre- and postvaginoplasty. Methods:. A community advisory board informed an anonymous online survey utilizing patient-reported outcomes. Pre- and postvaginoplasty respondents were recruited online. Survey measures included the Female Genital Self-Image Scale (FGSIS) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System sexual health measures. Welch approximation t tests were performed for FGSIS and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System questions, using Bonferroni correction. Results:. A total of 690 respondents prevaginoplasty (n = 525; 76%) and postvaginoplasty (n = 165; 24%) participated. The postoperative cohort, compared with the preoperative cohort, reported higher scores for orgasm (P = 0.0003), satisfaction (P = 0.001), and pleasure (P = 0.002). FGSIS total score was higher among postoperative respondents (79.4% ± 17.1%) than preoperative respondents (50.6% ± 15.1%) (P < 0.0001). Using Spearman rho, no significant correlation between FGSIS total score and any Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System subsectional measures was observed for the postoperative cohort, but a correlation (P

Background:. Increased access to care and insurance coverage has led to an increase in gender-affirming surgeries performed in the United States. Gender-affirming phalloplasty has a variety of donor sites and surgical techniques including both pedicled and free flaps. Although surgical techniques and patient outcomes are well-described, no reports in the literature specifically discuss postoperative management, which plays a crucial role in the success of these operations. Here, we present a postoperative protocol based on our institution’s experience with gender-affirming phalloplasty with the hope it will serve as a standardized, reproducible reference for centers looking to offer these procedures. Methods:. Patients undergoing gender-affirming phalloplasty at our institution followed a standardized protocol from the preoperative stage through phases of postoperative recovery. Medication, laboratory, physical and occupational therapy, flap monitoring, and dressing change guidelines were extracted and compiled into a single resource detailing the postoperative protocol in full. Results:. Our institution's standardized postoperative protocol for gender-affirming phalloplasty is detailed, focusing on flap monitoring, mobilization and activity, medications, and postoperative dressing care. One hundred thirty first-stage phalloplasty procedures were performed between May 2017 and December 2021, with two patients (1.5%) experiencing partial necrosis and one incidence (0.8%) of total flap loss. Conclusions:. For optimal and safe surgical outcomes, the surgical and extended care teams need to understand flap monitoring as well as specific postoperative protocols. A systematic approach focusing on flap monitoring, mobilization and activity, medications, and postoperative dressing care decreases errors, accelerates recovery, shortens length of stay, and instills confidence in the patient.

Background:. Gender-affirming mastectomy has become one of the most frequently performed procedures for transgender and nonbinary patients. Although there are a variety of potential surgical approaches available, the impact of technique on outcomes remains unclear. Here we present our experience performing periareolar and double incision mastectomies, with a focus on comparing patient demographics, preoperative risk factors, and surgical outcomes and complication rates between techniques. Methods:. Retrospective review identified patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy by the senior author between 2017 and 2020. Patients were stratified according to surgical technique, with demographics and postoperative outcomes compared between groups. Results:. In total, 490 patients underwent gender-affirming mastectomy during the study period. An estimated 96 patients underwent periareolar mastectomy, whereas 390 underwent double incision mastectomy. Demographics were similar between groups, and there were no differences in rates of hematoma (3.1% versus 5.6%, respectively; P = 0.90), seroma (33.3% versus 36.4%; P = 0.52), or revision procedures (14.6% versus 15.8% P = 0.84) based on technique. Conclusions:. Our results demonstrate no difference in the rates of postoperative complications or revision procedures based on surgical technique. These results also suggest that with an experienced surgeon and proper patient selection, both techniques of gender-affirming mastectomy can be performed safely and with comparable outcomes.

Background:. Transmasculine individuals may not have undergone gender-affirming mastectomy and retain natal breast tissue. Our center offers simultaneous oncologic mastectomy with gender-affirming reconstruction to patients who are diagnosed with breast cancer. This study is the first reported series of concurrent gender-affirming and oncologic mastectomies. Methods:. A retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy at a single institution from February 2017 to October 2021 was performed. Patients were included who had breast cancer diagnoses or pathologic lesions preoperatively. Demographic factors, comorbidities, surgical details, and oncologic history were collected. Both plastic surgery and breast surgery were present for the gender-affirming oncologic mastectomies. Results:. Five patients were identified who presented for gender-affirming mastectomy in the context of breast pathologies. Average patient age was 50.2 ± 14.8 years, and no patients used testosterone at any time. Two (40%) patients had a prior breast surgery that included a breast reduction in one patient and breast conserving lumpectomies in another. Sentinel lymph node biopsies were performed in all patients. Only one patient had a positive sentinel lymph node and was subsequently referred for postoperative radiation and chemotherapy. No oncologic recurrence has been detected with 20.6 and 10.0 months of mean and median follow-up. Conclusions:. When performed in a multidisciplinary and collaborative setting with breast surgeons and plastic surgeons, oncologic mastectomy can be performed safely while concurrently offering patients an aesthetic gender-affirming reconstructive outcome.

Introduction In the USA, transgender women are among the most vulnerable to HIV. In particular, transgender women of colour face high rates of infection and low uptake of important HIV prevention tools, including pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). This paper describes the design, sampling methods, data collection and analyses of the TURNNT (‘Trying to Understand Relationships, Networks and Neighbourhoods among Transgender women of colour’) study. In collaboration with communities of transgender women of colour, TURNNT aims to explore the complex social and environmental (ie, neighbourhood) structures that affect HIV prevention and other aspects of health in order to identify avenues for intervention.Methods and analyses TURNNT is a prospective cohort study, which will recruit 300 transgender women of colour (150 Black/African American, 100 Latina and 50 Asian/Pacific Islander participants) in New York City. There will be three waves of data collection separated by 6 months. At each wave, participants will provide information on their relationships, social and sexual networks, and neighbourhoods. Global position system technology will be used to generate individual daily path areas in order to estimate neighbourhood-level exposures. Multivariate analyses will be conducted to assess cross-sectional and longitudinal, independent and synergistic associations of personal relationships (notably individual social capital), social and sexual networks, and neighbourhood factors (notably neighbourhood-level social cohesion) with PrEP uptake and discontinuation.Ethics and dissemination The TURNNT protocol was approved by the Columbia University Institutional Review Board (reference no. AAAS8164). This study will provide novel insights into the relationship, network and neighbourhood factors that influence HIV prevention behaviours among transgender women of colour and facilitate exploration of this population’s health and well-being more broadly. Through community-based dissemination events and consultation with policy makers, this foundational work will be used to guide the development and implementation of future interventions with and for transgender women of colour.

Purpose: Improvements in mental health and quality of life are well documented for transgender patients following vaginoplasty. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) regarding sexual health are lacking in this intervention, or have not been validated in transgender patients. Methods: A community advisory board of transgender women informed an anonymous online survey utilizing PROs for those who were contemplative of (pre-) and post-vaginoplasty. They were recruited on online platforms not associated with an individual institution. Survey measures included the Female Genital Self-Image Scale (FGSIS) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) sexual health measures. Welch approximation t-tests were performed for FGSIS and PROMIS questions using Bonferroni correction. Results: 687 transgender patients pre-vaginoplasty (n = 522, 76%) and post-vaginoplasty (n = 165, 24%) responded. In PROMIS measures, the postoperative cohort reported higher ability to orgasm (p = 0.0003), satisfaction with sex life (p = 0.001), pleasure in sex life (p = 0.002), use of lubricant (p < 0.0001), and scar interfere with sexual satisfaction (p < 0.0001). FGSIS total score was higher among postoperative patients (27.8 ± 6.0) than preoperative patients (17.8 ± 5.3) (p < 0.0001). Using Spearman’s rho, no significant correlation between FGSIS total score and any PROMIS sub-sectional measures was observed for either cohort. 193 patients (133 preoperative, 60 postoperative) reported their responses about sex being influenced by the Covid-19 crisis. Conclusion: Patients who are contemplating vaginoplasty have worse sexual health and genital self-image than those who have had vaginoplasty. FGSIS scores did not correlate with PROMIS sexual health measures when controlling for prior vaginoplasty, demonstrating that sexual health is multimodal for each individual patient.

Background: Despite limited oncologic benefit, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rates have increased in the United States over the past 15 years. CPM is often accompanied by breast reconstruction, thereby requiring an interdisciplinary approach between breast and plastic surgeons. Despite this, little is known about plastic surgeons' (PS) perspectives of CPM. The purpose of this study was to assess PS practice patterns, knowledge of CPM oncologic benefits, and perceptions of the CPM decision-making process.Methods: An electronic survey was sent to 2,642 members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS). Questions assessed demographics, practice patterns, knowledge of CPM oncologic benefits, and perceptions of the CPM decision-making process.Results: ASPS response rate was 12.5% (n = 329). Most responders worked in private practice (69%), were male (81%) and had been in practice for ≥15 years (60%). The median number of CPM reconstructions performed per month was 2–4. Fifty-five percent of PS reported routine attendance at a breast multidisciplinary conference. Responders reported CPM discussion was most likely to be initiated by the patient (51%) followed by the breast surgeon (38%), and plastic surgeon (7.3%). According to PS, the most common reason patients choose CPM is a perceived increased contralateral cancer risk (86%). Most plastic surgeons (63%) assessed the benefits of CPM as worth the risk of additional surgery and the majority (53%) estimated the complication rate at 2X the risk of unilateral surgery. The majority (61%) of PS estimated risk of contralateral cancer in an average risk patient between