Flattening the Curve and Cutting Corners-Pearls and Pitfalls Facial Gender Affirming Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an experiential article based on the past 6 years experience of providing facial gender confirmation surgery (fGAS) at an academic medical center.

OBJECTIVE

While trainees are getting increasing exposure to aspects of facial gender affirming surgery (fGAS), the gap between trained providers and patients who can access care is currently still widening. A handful of fellowships across the country have emerged that include fGAS in their curriculum, but it will take another decade before the principles of affirming care and surgeries are systematically taught. Fortunately, the surgical principles and techniques required to perform fGAS are part of the skill set of any specialty surgeon trained in adult craniofacial trauma and esthetic facial surgery/rhinoplasty. It is the aim of this article to provide directly applicable knowledge with the goal to assist surgeons who consider offering fGAS in flattening the learning curve and hopefully contribute to increasing the quality of care provided for the transgender and gender diverse population. We hope to provide the reader with a very tangible article with the aims to 1) provide a simple systematic framework for an affirming consultation and preoperative assessment and 2) provide translatable surgical pearls and pitfalls for forehead feminization and gonial angle resection. The frontal sinus set back and gonial angle resection in our opinion are the most unique aspect to fGAS as rhinoplasty, genioplasty and other associated procedures (e.g., fat grafting) follow well established principles. We hope that the value of this article lies in the translatability of the presented principle to any practice setting without the need for VSP, special surgical instruments or technology beyond basic craniofacial tools.

METHODS

This is an experiential article based on the senior authors 6 year experience offering fGAS in an academic setting. The article is structured to outline both pearls and pittfalls and is supplemented by photographs and a surgical video.

RESULTS

A total of 19 pearls and pitfalls are outlined in the article.

CONCLUSIONS

Facial gender affirming surgery mostly follows established craniofacial and esthetic surgery principles. Forehead feminization and gonial angle feminization are the 2 components that diverge most from established surgical techniques and this article hopefully provides guidance to shorten the learning curve of surgeons.