Bustos, Valeria P.

AbstractBackground Abdominal wall vascularized composite allotransplantation (AW-VCA) is a novel reconstructive technique used for large abdominal wall defects in combination with intestinal transplantation (ITx) or multivisceral abdominal transplantation (MVTx). Since the introduction of this procedure, several studies have been published reporting their experience. This study aims to present a scoping review looking at all available evidence-based medicine information to understand the most current surgical techniques and clinical outcomes.Methods This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews checklist. A comprehensive research strategy of several databases was conducted.Results A total of 31 studies were included in this review, which comprised animal, cadaveric, and human studies. In human studies, four surgical techniques with high flap survival rates and low complication rates were found. In cadaveric studies, it was shown that the use of iliofemoral cuff-based flaps provided adequate tissue perfusion to the abdominal wall graft. Also, the use of thoracolumbar nerves have been described to provide functionality to the AW-VCA and prevent long-term muscle atrophy.Conclusion AW-VCA is a safe and efficient alternative for patients with large and complex abdominal wall defects. The future holds a promising evolution of a functional AW-VCA, though surgeons must face and overcome the challenge of distorted anatomy frequently present in this population. Forthcoming studies with a better level of evidence are required to evaluate functionality and differences between surgical techniques.

AbstractBackground Studies reporting on the deep circumflex iliac artery (DCIA) free flap are restricted to a limited number of patients and areas of application. The aim of this review was to assess the reliability and versatility of the DCIA free flap during reconstruction.Methods A comprehensive review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines using PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and SCOPUS. A critical analysis of pooled data was performed to assess outcomes employing the DCIA free flap.Results A total of 445 DCIA free flaps were included. The main recipient sites were head and neck (72.35%), lower extremity (20.67%), and upper extremity (6.74%). The main indications for reconstruction were tumor resection (73.8%) and trauma (17.43%). Fifty non-DCIA flaps were required to finalize the reconstruction of several defects. The pooled flap failure rate using the DCIA free flap was 4% (95% confidence interval: 1–8%). No significant heterogeneity was present across studies (Q statistic 22.12, p = 0.14; I 2 = 27.68%, p = 0.139). Complication rates for head and neck and limb reconstruction were 57.37 and 40.16%, respectively. The average length and surface area of bone flaps were 7.79 cm and 22.8 cm2, respectively. The area of the skin paddles was 117 cm2.Conclusion The DCIA free flap has shown to be a versatile reconstructive alternative for head and neck and short-medium size limb defects. However, the complexity of functions, the recipient site location, and a potential large defect can detract from the use of the DCIA free flap as an initial reconstructive option for head and neck and extensive limb defects.

Purpose : There is an unknown percentage of transgender and gender non-confirming individuals who undergo gender affirmation surgeries (GAS) that experiences regret. Regret could lead to physical and mental morbidity, also questioning the appropriateness of these procedures in selected patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of regret in transgender individuals who underwent GAS and evaluate associated factors. Methods : A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive research strategy was performed including the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, and Daily, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Random-effects meta-analysis of proportions, subgroup analysis, meta-regression, publication bias, and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: A total of 27 studies, pooling 7,928 transgender patients that underwent any type of GAS were included in this review. The pooled prevalence of regret after GAS was 1% (95% Confidence interval [CI] <1-2%). Overall, 33% underwent transmasculine surgical procedures and 67% transfeminine procedures. The prevalence of regrets among patients undergoing transmasculine and transfeminine surgeries was <1% (IC<1-<1%) and 1% (CI<1-2%), respectively. A total of 77 patients regretted having had GAS. Of them, 28 had minor and 34 had major regrets based on Pfäfflin’s regret classification. The majority of these had “clear regret” based on Kuiper and Cohen Kettenis’ classification. Conclusion: Based on this review, there is an extremely low prevalence of regret in transgender patients after GAS. We believe this study corroborates the improvements made in regard to selection criteria for GAS. However, there is high subjectivity in the assessment of regret and lack of standardized questionnaires, which highlight the importance of developing validated questionnaires in this population.

Background: Every day, we see more patients present to hospitals and clinics seeking gender-affirmation care to ameliorate the symptoms of gender dysphoria. However, to provide a multidisciplinary approach, it is important to offer an integrated clinical program that provides mental health assessment, endocrine therapy, physical therapy, research, and the full spectrum of surgical services devoted to transgender patients. This article describes our experience on building a specialized, multidisciplinary, academic state-of-the-art gender-affirmation program. Methods: Herein, we describe the main and critical components on how to build a multidisciplinary academic gender-affirmation program. We share our lessons learned from this experience and describe how to overcome some of the obstacles during the process. Results: Building a multidisciplinary academic gender-affirmation program requires an invested team, as each and every member is essential for feedback, referrals, and to improve patient’s experience. Institutional support is essential and by far the most important component to overcome some of the obstacles during the process. Having all team members working under the same institution provides all the critical components needed to improve outcomes and patient satisfaction. In addition, the collection of prospective data with a well-structured research team will provide information needed to improve clinical services and standardize clinical protocols, while leaving space for innovation. Conclusions: This article describes the steps and experience needed to build a multidisciplinary holistic academic gender-affirmation program. We provide our lessons learned during the process that will help guide those who intend to start an academic gender-affirmation program.

Background: There is an unknown percentage of transgender and gender non-confirming individuals who undergo gender-affirmation surgeries (GAS) that experiences regret. Regret could lead to physical and mental morbidity and questions the appropriateness of these procedures in selected patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of regret in transgender individuals who underwent GAS and evaluate associated factors. Methods: A systematic review of several databases was conducted. Random-effects meta-analysis, meta-regression, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: A total of 27 studies, pooling 7928 transgender patients who underwent any type of GAS, were included. The pooled prevalence of regret after GAS was 1% (95% CI <1%–2%). Overall, 33% underwent transmasculine procedures and 67% transfemenine procedures. The prevalence of regret among patients undergoing transmasculine and transfemenine surgeries was <1% (IC <1%–<1%) and 1% (CI <1%–2%), respectively. A total of 77 patients regretted having had GAS. Twenty-eight had minor and 34 had major regret based on Pfäfflin’s regret classification. The majority had clear regret based on Kuiper and Cohen-Kettenis classification. Conclusions: Based on this review, there is an extremely low prevalence of regret in transgender patients after GAS. We believe this study corroborates the improvements made in regard to selection criteria for GAS. However, there is high subjectivity in the assessment of regret and lack of standardized questionnaires, which highlight the importance of developing validated questionnaires in this population.

Background:Transmasculine chest surgery is the most common surgery performed in transmasculine patients, with high overall acceptance and low postoperative complication rates. Trends have shown clear improvement in quality of life and satisfaction. However, to the best of our knowledge, overall patient satisfaction after transmasculine chest surgery and associated factors are largely unknown. The aim of this study is to estimate the overall patient satisfaction in transgender men and nonbinary population after transmasculine chest surgery and to assess associated factors.Methods:A systematic review was conducted by searching literature in several databases. Meta-analyses of prevalence with a random-effect model for overall and subgroup prevalence were performed. Meta-regression, publication bias, and sensitivity analyses were conducted.Results:A total of 1052 transmasculine patients underwent any type of transmasculine chest surgery. The pooled overall postoperative satisfaction was 92% [95% confidence interval (CI) 88–96%]. In the subgroup metanalysis, patient satisfaction after periareolar mastectomy was 93% (CI 88%–97%) and after mastectomy with or without free nipple grafting was 90% (CI 84%–95%). Patient satisfaction for studies with mean follow-up >1 year was 91% (CI 83%–97%) and for mean follow-up of 1 year or less was 93% (CI 89%–96%).Conclusions:This study shows a high level of satisfaction in transmasculine chest surgery for both techniques, which remain stable over time. Also, our results show that this procedure impacts patient satisfaction beyond chest appearance and surgical outcomes. This corroborates its broad acceptance and the improvements in the standard of care, and decision-making approach.

Background: Vaginoplasty aims to create a functional feminine vagina, sensate clitoris, and labia minora and majora with acceptable cosmesis. The upward trend in the number of transfemale vaginoplasties has impacted the number of published articles on this topic. Herein, we conducted an updated systematic review on complications and patient-reported outcomes. Methods: A update on our previous systematic review was conducted. Several databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus were assessed. Random effects meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were performed. Results: After compiling the results of the update with the previous systematic review, a total of 57 studies pooling 4680 cases were included in the systematic review, and 52 studies were used in the meta-analysis. Overall pooled data including any surgical technique showed rates of 1% [95% confidence interval (CI) <0.1%–2%] of fistula, 11% (95% CI 8%–14%) of stenosis and/or strictures, 4% (95% CI 1%–9%) of tissue necrosis, and 3% (95% CI 1%–4%) of prolapse. Overall satisfaction was 91% (81%–98%). Regret rate was 2% (95% CI <1%–3%). Average neovaginal depth was 9.4 cm (7.9–10.9 cm) for the penile skin inversion and 15.3 cm (13.8–16.7 cm) for the intestinal vaginoplasty. Conclusions: Transfemale vaginoplasty is a key component of the comprehensive surgical treatment of transfemale patients with gender dysphoria. Over time, we will see an increased demand for these procedures, so adequate surgical training, clinical/surgical experience, and research outcomes are required, as we continue to strive to provide the best care possible for a population in need.