Swanson, Marco

Summary: Medical tattooing is a critical reconstructive component in women following mastectomy. Recently, novel three-dimensional tattooing techniques mimicking depth by using light and shadow principles have allowed for aesthetically superior results. However, results are variable between providers, and professionals skilled in tattooing are often inaccessible to patients. To assess the need and obtain more background information regarding current practices, the authors recorded survey results from 753 plastic and reconstructive surgery offices. Results showed that 23 percent of facilities that offer reconstruction do not perform or refer for nipple-areola complex tattooing, leaving the patients to seek the service on their own. In this article, the authors present the nipple-by-number device, a three-dimensionally–printed stencil to ensure an accurate, consistent, and personalized aesthetic result during three-dimensional nipple-areola complex tattooing. The nipple-by-number device permits the plastic surgeon or supervised treating specialist to inexpensively, efficiently, and expeditiously perform the three-dimensional nipple-areola complex tattooing in their office. Furthermore, the device gives the patients the option of having their premorbid nipple-areola complex anatomy restored through preoperative photographs or choosing a different nipple-areola complex from a catalogue of designs. The device can be applied on any reconstructed breast mound whether or not a nipple projection procedure has been performed.

Background: Interest in facial masculinization surgery is expected to increase as gender-affirming surgery becomes more widely accepted and available. The purpose of this study is to summarize the current literature describing operative techniques in facial masculinization surgery and provide an algorithmic approach to treating this patient population. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline databases were queried for literature on operative techniques and outcomes of facial masculinization surgery in transgender and cisgender patients, published through July 2018. Data on patient demographics, follow-up, operative techniques, complications, and outcomes were collected. Results: Fifteen of the 24 identified studies met inclusion criteria. Two studies discussed the outcomes of 7 subjects (6 trans-male and 1 cis-male) who underwent facial masculinization procedures. No objective outcomes were reported in either study; however, subjects were generally satisfied and there were no complications. The remaining studies reviewed operative techniques utilized in the cisgender population. Conclusion: A summary of considerations for each facial anatomic subunit and respective operative techniques for facial masculinization is presented. Current facial masculinization procedures in cisgender patients may be considered in the transgender patient population with favorable outcomes. However, further research is needed on techniques and objective outcome measures of facial masculinization procedures in the transgender population.