Editorial on gender affirming surgery.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Manrique OJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8105843 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Editorial on gender affirming surgery.
Manrique Oscar J OJ Persing John A JA Lu Xiaona X
Annals of translational medicine 20210401 7
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceWhile changes in federal and state laws mandating coverage of gender-affirming surgery (GAS) may have led to an increase in the number of annual cases, comprehensive data describing trends in both inpatient and outpatient procedures are limited.ObjectiveTo examine trends in inpatient and outpatient GAS procedures in the US and to explore the temporal trends in the types of GAS performed across age groups.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study includes data from 2016 to 2020 in the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample and the National Inpatient Sample. Patients with diagnosis codes for gender identity disorder, transsexualism, or a personal history of sex reassignment were identified, and the performance of GAS, including breast and chest procedures, genital reconstructive procedures, and other facial and cosmetic surgical procedures, were identified.Main outcome measuresWeighted estimates of the annual number of inpatient and outpatient procedures performed and the distribution of each class of procedure overall and by age were analyzed.ResultsA total of 48 019 patients who underwent GAS were identified, including 25 099 (52.3%) who were aged 19 to 30 years. The most common procedures were breast and chest procedures, which occurred in 27 187 patients (56.6%), followed by genital reconstruction (16 872 [35.1%]) and other facial and cosmetic procedures (6669 [13.9%]). The absolute number of GAS procedures rose from 4552 in 2016 to a peak of 13 011 in 2019 and then declined slightly to 12 818 in 2020. Overall, 25 099 patients (52.3%) were aged 19 to 30 years, 10 476 (21.8%) were aged 31 to 40, and 3678 (7.7%) were aged12 to 18 years. When stratified by the type of procedure performed, breast and chest procedures made up a greater percentage of the surgical interventions in younger patients, while genital surgical procedures were greater in older patients.Conclusions and relevancePerformance of GAS has increased substantially in the US. Breast and chest surgery was the most common group of procedures performed. The number of genital surgical procedures performed increased with increasing age.
| S-EPMC10448302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionMuch has been published on the surgical and functional results following Gender Affirming Surgery ('GAS') in trans individuals. Comprehensive results regarding sexual wellbeing following GAS, however, are generally lacking.AimTo review the impact of various GAS on sexual wellbeing in treatment seeking trans individuals, and provide a comprehensive list of clinical recommendations regarding the various surgical options of GAS on behalf of the European Society for Sexual Medicine.MethodsThe Medline, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were reviewed on the results of sexual wellbeing after GAS.Main outcomes measureThe task force established consensus statements regarding the somatic and general requirements before GAS and of GAS: orchiectomy-only, vaginoplasty, breast augmentation, vocal feminization surgery, facial feminization surgery, mastectomy, removal of the female sexual organs, metaidoioplasty, and phalloplasty. Outcomes pertaining to sexual wellbeing- sexual satisfaction, sexual relationship, sexual response, sexual activity, enacted sexual script, sexuality, sexual function, genital function, quality of sex life and sexual pleasure- are provided for each statement separately.ResultsThe present position paper provides clinicians with statements and recommendations for clinical practice, regarding GAS and their effects on sexual wellbeing in trans individuals. These data, are limited and may not be sufficient to make evidence-based recommendations for every surgical option. Findings regarding sexual wellbeing following GAS were mainly positive. There was no data on sexual wellbeing following orchiectomy-only, vocal feminization surgery, facial feminization surgery or the removal of the female sexual organs. The choice for GAS is dependent on patient preference, anatomy and health status, and the surgeon's skills. Trans individuals may benefit from studies focusing exclusively on the effects of GAS on sexual wellbeing.ConclusionThe available evidence suggests positive results regarding sexual wellbeing following GAS. We advise more studies that underline the evidence regarding sexual wellbeing following GAS. This position statement may aid both clinicians and patients in decision-making process regarding the choice for GAS. Özer M, Toulabi SP, Fisher AD, et al. ESSM Position Statement "Sexual Wellbeing After Gender Affirming Surgery". Sex Med 2022;10:100471.
| S-EPMC8847816 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceGender-affirming surgery is often beneficial for gender-diverse or -dysphoric patients. Access to gender-affirming surgery is often limited through restrictive legislation and insurance policies.ObjectiveTo investigate the association between California's 2013 implementation of the Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act, which prohibits insurers and health plans from limiting benefits based on a patient's sex, gender, gender identity, or gender expression, and utilization of gender-affirming surgery among California residents.Design, setting, and participantsPopulation epidemiology study of transgender and gender-diverse patients undergoing gender-affirming surgery (facial, chest, and genital surgery) between 2005 and 2019. Utilization of gender-affirming surgery in California before and after implementation of the Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act in July 2013 was compared with utilization in Washington and Arizona, control states chosen because of geographic similarity and because they expanded Medicaid on the same date as California-January 1, 2014. The date of last follow-up was December 31, 2019.ExposuresCalifornia's Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act, implemented on July 9, 2013.Main outcomes and measuresReceipt of gender-affirming surgery, defined as undergoing at least 1 facial, chest, or genital procedure.ResultsA total of 25 252 patients (California: n = 17 934 [71%]; control: n = 7328 [29%]) had a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Median ages were 34.0 years in California (with or without gender-affirming surgery), 39 years (IQR, 28-49 years) among those undergoing gender-affirming surgery in control states, and 36 years (IQR, 22-56 years) among those not undergoing gender-affirming surgery in control states. Patients underwent at least 1 gender-affirming surgery within the study period in 2918 (11.6%) admissions-2715 (15.1%) in California vs 203 (2.8%) in control states. There was a statistically significant increase in gender-affirming surgery in the third quarter of July 2013 in California vs control states, coinciding with the timing of the Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act (P < .001). Implementation of the policy was associated with an absolute 12.1% (95% CI, 10.3%-13.9%; P < .001) increase in the probability of undergoing gender-affirming surgery in California vs control states observed in the subset of insured patients (13.4% [95% CI, 11.5%-15.4%]; P < .001) but not self-pay patients (-22.6% [95% CI, -32.8% to -12.5%]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceImplementation in California of its Insurance Gender Nondiscrimination Act was associated with a significant increase in utilization of gender-affirming surgery in California compared with the control states Washington and Arizona. These data might inform state legislative efforts to craft policies preventing discrimination in health coverage for state residents, including transgender and gender-diverse patients.
| S-EPMC10015311 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo systematically review Medicaid policies state-by-state for gender-affirming surgery coverage.Data sources and study settingPrimary data were collected for each US state utilizing the LexisNexis legal database, state legislature publications, and Medicaid manuals.Study designA cross-sectional study evaluating Medicaid coverage for numerous gender-affirming surgeries.Data collection/extraction methodsWe previously reported on state health policies that protect gender-affirming care under Medicaid coverage. Building upon our prior work, we systematically assessed the 27 states with protective policies to determine coverage for each type of gender-affirming surgery. We analyzed Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgeries in four domains: chest, genital, craniofacial and neck reconstruction, and miscellaneous procedures. Medicaid coverage for each type of surgery was categorized as explicitly covered, explicitly noncovered, or not described.Principal findingsAmong the 27 states with protective Medicaid policies, 17 states (63.0%) provided explicit coverage for at least one gender-affirming chest procedure and at least one gender-affirming genital procedure, while only eight states (29.6%) provided explicit coverage for at least one craniofacial and neck procedure (p = 0.04). Coverage for specific surgical procedures within these three anatomical domains varied. The most common explicitly covered procedures were breast reduction/mastectomy and hysterectomy (n = 17, 63.0%). The most common explicitly noncovered surgery was reversal surgery (n = 12, 44.4%). Several states did not describe the specific surgical procedures covered; thus, final coverage rates are indeterminate.ConclusionsIn 2022, 52.9% of states had health policies that protected gender-affirming care under Medicaid; however, coverage for various gender-affirming surgical procedures remains both variable and occasionally unspecified. When specified, craniofacial and neck reconstruction is the least covered anatomical area compared with chest and genital reconstruction.
| S-EPMC11622269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTransgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals face barriers when seeking top surgery, or bilateral mastectomies, as part of surgical transition, leading to delayed care and adverse health outcomes. Understanding differential experiences between nonbinary and binary patients is crucial for improving TGD patient care, but this distinction is seldom made in the current literature.MethodsThis single-center cross-sectional mixed-methods survey study conducted between 2022 and 2023 enrolled all consecutive TGD patients undergoing top surgery. Significant differences between datasets were determined by two-sample unpaired t tests. Summative content analysis and descriptive analysis were performed for free-text responses.ResultsThirty-seven binary and 71 nonbinary patients completed the survey. Lack of funding, long wait times within the healthcare system, and long wait times to access surgery were the three most impactful barriers for both cohorts. Nonbinary patients were more impacted by a lack of TGD-friendly surgeons and community physicians, prejudice from surgical center staff and community doctors, and employment concerns. More binary patients desired a "masculine chest" and to stop using a binder. The nonbinary group more frequently desired a "smaller chest" and had greater variability of surgical goals.ConclusionsBinary and nonbinary TGD patients both experience barriers to top surgery; however nonbinary patients may experience distinct barriers and have differential surgical goals. It is important to discuss specific surgery goals and offer top surgery options beyond bilateral mastectomy with nipple grafting, especially with nonbinary patients.
| S-EPMC11452094 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite women constituting over half of new doctors, gender disparity remains an issue. Surgery has shown particularly slow progress towards gender parity. This study aimed to quantify gender representation within editorial boards of the highest ranking international general surgery journals. Surgical journals were collated using two indices: SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) and Journal Impact Factor (JIF). Non-general surgery journals were excluded. Journals were contacted, requesting gender editorial team demographics. Editorial board data were collected via journal websites on 28 November 2019. The top 25 general surgery journals according to SJR and JIF ranking methods were determined, identifying 28 unique journals. Editorial board data were publicly available for 27 of these 28 surgical journals, and were examined. Women accounted for 20.2 per cent (568 of 2816) of total editorial board positions. Women constituted 11 per cent (4 of 36) of editor-in-chief positions, 32 per cent (29 of 92) of deputy editors, and 19.1 per cent (369 of 1935) of general editorial board positions. The findings demonstrate gender disparity within editorial boards of the most prominent general surgery journals.
| S-EPMC8036998 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTop surgery, or masculinization of the chest, is often the first and sometimes only procedure in gender-affirming surgery for transgender- and gender-diverse persons assigned female at birth. In recent years, there has been improved access to care for transgender individuals and increased demand for top surgery. Our aim was to investigate the degree of satisfaction with the postoperative outcome after top surgery in transgender men.MethodsNinety transgender men who underwent top surgery between September 1, 2013 and August 31, 2018 were included. Patients were surveyed from 5 to 62 months after surgery. Participants' files were evaluated for complications, and 84 (response rate 93.3%) participants answered a questionnaire evaluating patient satisfaction postoperatively.ResultsPatients were either satisfied or partially satisfied with the overall experience of undergoing surgery and the postoperative result in 90.5% of responses. Patients were very satisfied with their clothed appearance in 89.3% of responses, whereas only 44.1% were very satisfied with their nonclothed appearance and 46.4% partially satisfied. Patients were also very satisfied with postoperative scars in 47.6% of responses and nipple reconstruction in 48.8%. Only two patients expressed their regret.ConclusionSatisfaction outcomes after top surgery are generally positive, especially in respect of clothed appearance, self-confidence, and self-acceptance.
| S-EPMC10066763 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9520432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the prevalence of decisional regret regarding preoperative fertility preservation choices after gender-affirming surgery or removal of reproductive organs.DesignCross-sectional.SettingUniversity-based pratice.PatientsA total of 57 survey respondents identifying as transgender men or gender nonbinary with a history of gender-affirming surgery or removal of reproductive organs between 2014 and 2023 with the University of North Carolina Minimally Invasive Gynecology division.InterventionSurvey or questionnaire.Main outcome measuresThe prevalence and severity of decisional regret regarding preoperative fertility preservation choices were measured with the use of the validated decisional regret scale (DRS) (scored 0-100). Secondary outcomes included patient-reported barriers to pursuing reproductive endocrinology and infertility consultation and fertility preservation treatment.ResultsThe survey response rate was 50.9% (57/112). "Mild" to "severe" decisional regret was reported by 38.6% (n = 22) of survey respondents, with DRS scores among all respondents ranging from 0-85. Higher median DRS scores were associated with patient-reported inadequacy of preoperative fertility counseling regarding implications of surgery on future fertility or family-building (0 vs. 50) and fertility preservation options (0 vs. 12.5). No desire for future fertility at the time of fertility counseling was the most frequent reason (68.4%) for declining a referral to reproductive endocrinology and infertility for additional fertility preservation discussion.ConclusionsDecisional regret regarding preoperative fertility preservation choices is experienced among transgender men or gender nonbinary persons after gender-affirming surgery or the removal of reproductive organs. Preoperative, patient-centered fertility counseling and fertility preservation treatments should be provided to reduce the risk of future regret.
| S-EPMC10958706 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTransgender individuals have long experienced discrimination and exclusion from medicine. Misgendering occurs when an individual is referred to using a gender or address incongruent with their identity. We evaluated the incidence of misgendering throughout the perioperative experience for patients undergoing gender-affirming surgery (GAS).MethodsPatients diagnosed with gender dysphoria who previously received GAS by the senior author were contacted to complete an IRB-approved survey to evaluate instances of misgendering while in the hospital for GAS. Study results were summarized using descriptive statistics.ResultsOf 471 patients contacted, 182 completed the survey (38.6%). The most cited gender identity was transfemale (28.0%). Most patients reported respect for their gender identity (60.4%) and name (76.8%) during their perioperative experience. Twenty-two percent cited triggering experiences, and 15.4% reported interactions with healthcare employees causing them to reach out to a support system. Misgendering most commonly included incorrect use of patients' preferred names and/or pronouns (n = 50, 86.2%), most commonly at surgical check-in (n = 10, 45.5%). Recommendations to improve feelings of gender congruence during patients' stay included updated names and gender identities in electronic medical records (80.8%), and names and pronouns listed on curtains and doors (52.3%) and name tags (51.5%).ConclusionsUntil now, the exact incidence of misgendering among patients seeking GAS have not been well established. Despite high levels of satisfaction, a large proportion still reported serious instances of misgendering. Improvements must be made to the perioperative experience to reduce misgendering and provide support and comfort during the sensitive period surrounding patients' gender transition.Level of evidence: Not gradable.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00238-022-02040-2.
| S-EPMC9873212 | biostudies-literature