Faculty Bibliography

As medicine becomes more complex, there is pressure for new and more innovative educational methods. Given the economic burden associated with in-person simulation, healthcare, including the realm of surgical education, has begun employing virtual reality (VR). Potential benefits of the addition of VR to surgical learning include increased pre-operative resident exposure to surgical techniques and procedures and better patient safety outcomes. However, these new technological advances, such as VR, may not replicate organic tissues or accurately simulate medical care and surgical scenarios, creating unrealistic pseudo-environments. Similarly, while advancements have been made, there are ongoing disparities concerning the utilization of these technologies. These disparities include aspects such as the availability of stable internet connections and the cost of implementing these technologies. In accordance with other innovative technologies, VR possesses upfront economic costs that may preclude equitable use in different academic centers around the world. As such, VR may further widen educational quality between high- and low-resource nations. This analysis integrates recent innovations in VR technology with existing discourse on global health and surgical equality. In doing so, it offers preliminary guidance to ensure that the implementation of VR occurs in an equitable, safe, and sustainable fashion.

Little is known about patients' and families' lived experiences of participating in pediatric gene therapy (GT) clinical trials. Currently, pediatric GT research targets a broad range of indications--including rare and ultra-rare diseases--which vary in severity and in the availability of alternative therapies. Pediatric GT differs meaningfully from adult GT because the decision to participate involves a dyad of both the child and parent or caregiver/s. It is critical to understand patients' and caregivers' perceptions and experiences of social, emotional, physical, and logistical burdens or benefits of participating in such trials, and how they weigh and prioritize these factors when deciding whether to participate. We conducted a scoping review of the current literature in this subject area with objectives to (1) provide an overview of existing literature, (2) identify gaps and areas for further research, and (3) better understand the lived impact of pediatric GT research on patients and their parents/caregivers. Four themes emerged, including (1) weighing risks and benefits (2) timing of GT trial participation, (3) value of clear communication, and (4) potential impact on quality of life. Notably, our sample surfaced articles about how patients/parents/caregivers were thinking about GT-their understanding of its safety, efficacy, and risks-rather than accounts of their experiences, which was our initial intention. Nevertheless, our findings offer useful insights to improve the informed consent process and promote a more patient- and family-centered approach. Moreover, our findings can contribute to patient advocacy organizations' efforts to develop educational materials tailored to patients' and families' expressed informational needs and perspectives, and can inform more patient- and family-centered policies from GT clinical trial sponsors.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Hysterectomy is a gynecological procedure sometimes performed as part of the gender-affirming process for transgender and gender-expansive patients assigned female at birth. Our goal was to compare surgical outcomes between patients undergoing gender-affirming hysterectomy and patients undergoing hysterectomy for benign menstrual disorders. We then explored the implications of gender-affirming hysterectomy for uterine transplantation. METHODS:We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2009 through 2018. We identified patients undergoing hysterectomy in the United States based on Current Procedural Terminology code. We used the International Classification of Diseases 9 or 10 codes to identify patients with benign menstrual disorders (non-gender-affirming group) and gender dysphoria (gender-affirming group). We compared patient characteristics and surgical complications. RESULTS:Of the 40,742 patients that met inclusion criteria, 526 (1.3%) patients were individuals with gender dysphoria. Compared to patients who underwent hysterectomy for benign menstrual disorders, gender-affirming patients were younger, were healthier, had a lower prevalence of diabetes, and were more likely to undergo surgery in the outpatient setting, with shorter time to discharge. Complication rates were similar between groups. Logistic regression controlling for the American Society of Anesthesiology classification determined the difference of return to the operating room was not statistically significant (OR 1.082; 95% CI, 0.56-2.10; p = 0.816). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Gender-affirming hysterectomy has a safety profile similar to hysterectomy performed for benign menstrual disorders. Researchers should further explore the possibility of uterus donation among these patients as they may be suitable candidates.

Use of body mass index (BMI) as a health care metric is controversial, especially in candidacy assessments for gender-affirming surgery. When considering experiences of fat trans individuals, it is important to advocate for equitable divisions of responsibility for and recognition of systemic fat phobia. This commentary on a case suggests strategies for increasing equitable access to safe surgery for all body types. If surgeons use BMI thresholds, simultaneous effort must be made to advocate for data collection so that surgical candidacy criteria are evidence-based and equitably applied.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:The expanded access (EA) pathway permits patients to be treated with investigational medical products outside clinical trials. Because cancer care is a common indication for which EA is sought and these efforts require physician management, understanding oncologists' perspectives can help illuminate factors influencing patient access. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To learn how oncologists practicing at academic medical centers (AMCs) perceive EA and their role in offering it. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:This qualitative study used data from semistructured interviews conducted from February 2020 to September 2021 with a purposive sample of oncologists recruited from large, urban AMCs in the northeast United States. Oncologists who had submitted at least 1 single-patient EA request to the institutional review boards at the University of Pennsylvania, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, NYU Langone Health, and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute from January 1, 2014, through January 31, 2020, were eligible to participate. Data were analyzed from July 2021 to March 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Interviews focused on oncologist practice demographics, experience with EA, factors relevant to decisions to pursue EA and comfort with those decisions, perspectives on oncologists' role in EA, perspectives on the FDA's role, and the Right to Try pathway to access investigational drugs. Results/UNASSIGNED:Eligible oncologists were interviewed until thematic saturation was reached, resulting in 25 interviews; most participants were women (15 participants [60%]), reported primarily treating adult patients (15 participants [60%]), had more than 10 years of clinical experience (16 participants [64%]), and had submitted at least 2 single-patient EA requests to their institutional review boards during the relevant period (14 participants [56%]). Oncologists viewed EA as an important tool for securing what they determined to be the best treatment option for their patients based on their own expert assessment of available data. Interviewees reported that they would rather access interventions as commercially available products or through clinical trials; however, if the preferred option was not available through these means, they viewed pursuit of EA as part of their obligation to patients, while often recognizing the potential for inequities in the broader patient population beyond their institutions. Participating oncologists felt confident pursuing investigational drugs for treatment use, despite the absence of FDA marketing approval, and did not necessarily view EA as a last resort. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:These findings indicate that oncologists practicing in large academic settings sought to treat patients with the interventions they deemed most likely to be beneficial, regardless of approval status. As such, they viewed EA as an unexceptional means to obtain promising products, although it remains unclear whether their confidence in evaluating investigational treatments was justified. Future research should examine whether oncologists outside large AMCs share this confidence, as differences may influence patient access to the EA treatment pathway.

UNLABELLED:Facial transplantation (FT) has advanced extensively over the past two decades, with over 40 transplants performed to date. Over this time, the FT literature has evolved as well, from early discussions on ethics and feasibility of FT to functional outcomes reports more recently. We aimed to evaluate the entire body of FT literature to identify trends in publications over time in addition to current existing gaps in the field. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the published FT literature from 1994, the first year FT was mentioned in the literature, through July 2020. Co-authorship and keyword information were analyzed using VOSviewer. Articles were manually categorized based on keywords and their aim to provide insight on trends. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 2182 articles were identified. Analysis identified the top 50 publishing authors in the field and demonstrated co-authorship linkage between 84.8% of the top 1000 authors. Clinical surgical techniques, protocols, and experiments were the most frequently published category. Within clinical outcomes, immunologic outcomes were most frequent, while psychosocial were the lowest. Gaps were identified in long-term outcomes reporting and patient-reported outcomes, with physician-reported outcomes heavily outweighing patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:As the field continues to evolve, rigorous tracking of publication patterns over time will encourage development of a more robust evidence base, identify gaps in the published literature, and highlight opportunities to enhance collaboration in the field. This data will provide surgeons and research institutions with information to further improve this life-changing procedure.

BACKGROUND:The limitations of metoidioplasty and phalloplasty have been reported as deterrents for transgender and other gender expansive individuals (T/GE) desiring gender affirming surgery, and thus penile transplantation, epithesis, and composite tissue engineering (CTE) are being explored as alternative interventions. AIM:We aim to understand the acceptability of novel techniques and factors that may influence patient preferences in surgery to best treat this diverse population. METHODS:Descriptions of metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, epithesis, CTE, and penile transplant were delivered via online survey from January 2020 to May 2020. Respondents provided ordinal ranking of interest in each intervention from 1 to 5, with 1 representing greatest personal interest. Demographics found to be significant on univariable analysis underwent multivariable ordinal logistic regression to determine independent predictors of interest. OUTCOMES:Sexual orientation, gender, and age were independent predictors of interest in interventions. RESULTS:There were 965 qualifying respondents. Gay respondents were less likely to be interested in epithesis (OR: 2.282; P = .001) compared to other sexual orientations. Straight individuals were the least likely to be interested in metoidioplasty (OR 3.251; P = .001), and most interested in penile transplantation (OR 0.382; P = .005) and phalloplasty (OR 0.288, P < .001) as potential interventions. Gay and queer respondents showed a significant interest in phalloplasty (Gay: OR 0.472; P = .004; Queer: OR 0.594; P = .017). Those who identify as men were more interested in phalloplasty (OR 0.552; P < .001) than those with differing gender identities. Older age was the only variable associated with a decreased interest in phalloplasty (OR 1.033; P = .001). No demographic analyzed was an independent predictor of interest in CTE. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS:A thorough understanding of patient gender identity, sexual orientation, and sexual behavior should be obtained during consultation for gender affirming penile reconstruction, as these factors influence patient preferences for surgical interventions. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS:This study used an anonymous online survey that was distributed through community channels and allowed for the collection of a high quantity of responses throughout the T/GE population that would otherwise be impossible through single-center or in-person means. The community-based methodology minimized barriers to honesty, such as courtesy bias. The survey was only available in English and respondents skewed young and White. CONCLUSION:Despite previously reported concerns about the limitations of metoidioplasty, participants ranked it highly, along with CTE, in terms of personal interest, with sexual orientation, gender, and age independently influencing patient preferences, emphasizing their relevance in patient-surgeon consultations.

BACKGROUND:The limitations of metoidioplasty and phalloplasty have been reported as deterrents for transgender and other gender expansive individuals (T/GE) desiring gender affirming surgery, and thus penile transplantation, epithesis, and composite tissue engineering (CTE) are being explored as alternative interventions. AIM/OBJECTIVE:We aim to understand the acceptability of novel techniques and factors that may influence patient preferences in surgery to best treat this diverse population. METHODS:Descriptions of metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, epithesis, CTE, and penile transplant were delivered via online survey from January 2020 to May 2020. Respondents provided ordinal ranking of interest in each intervention from 1 to 5, with 1 representing greatest personal interest. Demographics found to be significant on univariable analysis underwent multivariable ordinal logistic regression to determine independent predictors of interest. OUTCOMES/RESULTS:Sexual orientation, gender, and age were independent predictors of interest in interventions. RESULTS:There were 965 qualifying respondents. Gay respondents were less likely to be interested in epithesis (OR: 2.282; P = .001) compared to other sexual orientations. Straight individuals were the least likely to be interested in metoidioplasty (OR 3.251; P = .001), and most interested in penile transplantation (OR 0.382; P = .005) and phalloplasty (OR 0.288, P < .001) as potential interventions. Gay and queer respondents showed a significant interest in phalloplasty (Gay: OR 0.472; P = .004; Queer: OR 0.594; P = .017). Those who identify as men were more interested in phalloplasty (OR 0.552; P < .001) than those with differing gender identities. Older age was the only variable associated with a decreased interest in phalloplasty (OR 1.033; P = .001). No demographic analyzed was an independent predictor of interest in CTE. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:A thorough understanding of patient gender identity, sexual orientation, and sexual behavior should be obtained during consultation for gender affirming penile reconstruction, as these factors influence patient preferences for surgical interventions. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS/UNASSIGNED:This study used an anonymous online survey that was distributed through community channels and allowed for the collection of a high quantity of responses throughout the T/GE population that would otherwise be impossible through single-center or in-person means. The community-based methodology minimized barriers to honesty, such as courtesy bias. The survey was only available in English and respondents skewed young and White. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Despite previously reported concerns about the limitations of metoidioplasty, participants ranked it highly, along with CTE, in terms of personal interest, with sexual orientation, gender, and age independently influencing patient preferences, emphasizing their relevance in patient-surgeon consultations. A. Parker, G. Blasdel, C. Kloer et al. "Postulating Penis: What Influences the Interest of Transmasculine Patients in Gender Affirming Penile Reconstruction Techniques?". J Sex Med 2021;XX:XXX-XXX.