Masculinizing Chest Reconstruction in Transgender and Nonbinary Individuals: An Analysis of Epidemiology, Surgical Technique, and Postoperative Outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Chest reconstruction ('top surgery') is an important component of transition in the transmasculine population that can substantially improve gender incongruence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the demographic characteristics, surgical technique, and postoperative outcomes following transmasculine chest surgery.

METHODS

Using ICD codes, we identified all cases of gender-affirming transmasculine chest surgery from the ACS NSQIP database (2010-2017). CPT codes were used to categorize patients by reconstructive modality: reduction versus mastectomy (± free nipple grafting [FNG]). Univariate analysis was conducted to assess for differences in demographics, comorbidities, and postoperative complications. Multivariable regression analysis was used to control for confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 755 cases were identified, of whom 591 (78.3%) were mastectomies and 164 (21.7%) were reductions. No significant differences were noted in terms of age or BMI. Mastectomies had shorter operative times, but similar length of stay compared to reductions. Rates of postoperative complications were low, with 4.7% (n = 28) of mastectomies and 3.7% (n = 6) of reductions experiencing at least one all-cause complications. Postoperative complication rates were not statistically different between mastectomy with (3.4%) and without (5.6%) FNG. After controlling for confounders, there was no difference in terms of risk of all-cause complications between reduction and mastectomy, with or without FNG.

CONCLUSION

Mastectomy and reduction mammaplasty are both safe procedures for chest reconstruction in the transmasculine population. These results may be used to encourage shared decision making between patient and surgeon such that the reconstructive modality of choice best aligns with the desired aesthetic outcome.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.