Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To address instances when there is insufficient remnant tissue to perform revision following canal-deepening gender affirming vaginoplasty revisions as indicated by insufficient depth. Options for lining of the vaginal canal include skin grafts, peritoneal flaps, or intestinal segment. Our center uses robotically harvested peritoneal flaps in vaginal canal revisions. When the peritoneal flap is insufficient for full canal coverage, we use AlloDerm, an acellular dermal matrix, for additional coverage. METHODS:Retrospective analysis of 9 patients who underwent revision RPV with AlloDerm was performed. Tubularized AlloDerm grafts were used to connect remnant vaginal lining to the peritoneal flaps. Revision indications, surgical and patient outcomes, and patient-reported post-op dilation were recorded. RESULTS:Nine patients underwent revision RPV using AlloDerm for canal deepening. Median follow-up was 368 days (Range 186-550). Following revision, median depth and width at last follow-up were 12.1 cm and 3.5 cm, and median increase in depth and width were 9.7 cm and 0.9 cm, respectively. There were no intraoperative complications. Two patients had focal areas of excess AlloDerm that were treated with in-office excision without compromise of the caliber or depth of the otherwise healed, epithelialized canal. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:AlloDerm is an off-the-shelf option that does not require a secondary donor site. The use of AlloDerm for a pilot cohort of patients lacking sufficient autologous tissue for revision RPV alone was demonstrated to be safe and effective at a median 1-year follow-up.

Objective: The Preserve it And Turn it Inside Out (PATIO) technique has been used for repair of urethrocutaneous fistula (UCF) after hypospadias repair. We demonstrate this technique for the repair of UCF in the adult cisgender and transgender population. This technique preserves and inverts the fistula tract to prevent egress of urine. We present a video detailing our updated surgical technique and outcomes from our single-institution experience. Patients and surgical procedure: A retrospective review of adult patients who underwent PATIO repair for UCF between November 2017 and July 2021 by a single surgeon (LCZ) was performed. A circumferential incision is made around the fistula opening, a figure-of-8 or purse string suture with absorbable suture is placed across the opening, and the suture is pulled through the urethral meatus thereby inverting the fistula tract. The suture is secured to the meatus and the skin overlying the fistula is closed in two layers.
Result(s): Nine patients met criteria with a total of 10 PATIO procedures performed. Six patients were cisgender and three were transgender. Of the 6 cisgender patients, etiology of UCF included penile piercings (4/6) and prior hypospadias repair (2/6). All fistulas were distal. All three transgender patients developed UCF as a result of phalloplasty and fistula location was proximal. Median fistula size was 2.6mm (range 0.6-4.6), median operative time was 55 min (range 29-124), and median estimated blood loss was 5 ml (range 5-50). No intraoperative complications were reported. Three patients underwent adjunctive procedures the time of repair. Overall success rate was 70% with one patient undergoing successful repeat PATIO repair.
Conclusion(s): PATIO repair offers a safe and durable method of UCF repair in adult cisgender and transgender patients with a range of UCF presentations. We report a short operative time, minimal blood loss, minimal need for urethral catheterization, and a 70% success rate. Adjunctive maneuvers may be employed concurrently in complex or recurrent cases.
Funding(s): None.
Copyright

Background: Patient-reported outcomes regarding sexual health are lacking or have not been validated for transgender patients following vaginoplasty. The aim of this study is to further characterize the difference in sexual health, genital self-image, and the relationship between them for patients who were pre- and postvaginoplasty. Methods: A community advisory board informed an anonymous online survey utilizing patient-reported outcomes. Pre- and postvaginoplasty respondents were recruited online. Survey measures included the Female Genital Self-Image Scale (FGSIS) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System sexual health measures. Welch approximation t tests were performed for FGSIS and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System questions, using Bonferroni correction. Results: A total of 690 respondents prevaginoplasty (n = 525; 76%) and postvaginoplasty (n = 165; 24%) participated. The postoperative cohort, compared with the preoperative cohort, reported higher scores for orgasm (P = 0.0003), satisfaction (P = 0.001), and pleasure (P = 0.002). FGSIS total score was higher among postoperative respondents (79.4% ± 17.1%) than preoperative respondents (50.6% ± 15.1%) (P < 0.0001). Using Spearman rho, no significant correlation between FGSIS total score and any Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System subsectional measures was observed for the postoperative cohort, but a correlation (P <0.001) was observed for the preoperative cohort. Conclusions: Individuals who are contemplating vaginoplasty have worse sexual health and genital self-image than those who underwent vaginoplasty, yet genital self-image does not correlate directly with sexual health. Sexual health is multimodal for each person.

BACKGROUND:Gender-affirming mastectomy, or "top surgery," has become one of the most frequently performed procedures for transgender and nonbinary patients. However, management of perioperative testosterone therapy remains controversial. Despite a lack of supporting evidence, many surgeons require cessation of testosterone prior to top surgery. This represents the first study to compare complication rates in patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy with and without discontinuation of perioperative testosterone. METHODS:Retrospective review identified patients undergoing top surgery by the senior author between 2017 and 2020. Reflecting a change in the senior author's practice, prior to May 2019, all patients were required to discontinue testosterone prior to surgery, while all patients treated after this point continued their testosterone regimens throughout the perioperative period. Patients were stratified according to testosterone regimen and perioperative hormone management, with demographics and postoperative outcomes compared between groups. RESULTS:490 patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy during the study period were included. Testosterone was held perioperatively in 175 patients and continued in 211 patients, while 104 patients never received testosterone therapy. Demographics were similar between groups, and there was no difference in rates of hematoma (2.9% vs. 2.8% vs 2.9% respectively, p=0.99), seroma (1.1% vs. 0% vs 1%, p=0.31), venous thromboembolism (0% vs. 0.5% vs 0%, p=0.99), or overall complications (6.9% vs. 4.3% vs 5.8%, p=0.54). CONCLUSIONS:Our results demonstrate no difference in postoperative complication rates between groups. While further investigation is warranted, our data suggest that routine cessation of testosterone in the perioperative period is not necessary for patients undergoing gender-affirming mastectomy.

SUMMARY:The surgical treatment of gender incongruence with gender-affirming surgery requires a sophisticated understanding of the substantial diversity in patient expectations and desired outcomes. There are patients with gender incongruence who desire surgical intervention to achieve the conventional bodily configuration typical for cisgender men and women and those who desire surgery without the goal of typical cisgender presentation. Proper communication regarding diverse expectations poses a challenge to those unfamiliar with the nuances of this heterogeneous population; such difficulties have led to mistakes during patient care. Based on the lessons learned from these experiences, the authors provide conceptual recommendations with specific examples to account for cultural context and conceptions of gender within surgical practice and scientific research.

OBJECTIVE:To provide a summary of surgical technique and outcomes for Heineke-Mikulicz preputioplasty (HMP), a foreskin-preserving surgical treatment for phimosis in the adult population. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 7 patients who underwent HMP by a single surgeon from May 2017 to May 2021. Variables included patient demographics, intraoperative considerations, and post-operative course. HMP is performed using a 2-3 cm vertical incision over the phimotic band on the dorsal surface to just above Buck's fascia. Additional incisions are made on the ventral surface if phimosis remains persistent after dorsal release. The incision is closed horizontally in 2 layers. RESULTS:Seven patients underwent HMP. Median age was 47.3 and median BMI was 24.3. Five patients reported bothersome phimosis and 1 each reported paraphimosis and frenular tethering. Six patients requested foreskin sparing surgery as a personal preference and 1 patient was an intraoperative consult. Topical betamethasone was attempted in 3 of 7 patients. The median time from diagnosis to surgery was 2 months. Median operative time was 45.5 minutes and median estimated blood loss was 5 mL. Two patients required both dorsal and ventral incisions. No intraoperative complications were reported and all patients were discharged the same day. At median follow-up of 1.8 months, 1 patient reported bothersome phimosis secondary to scar formation treated successfully with triamcinolone. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:HMP is a safe and effective method of treating even very significant phimosis in patients trying to avoid circumcision or intraoperative consults where preferences may be unclear. Our method takes less time than traditional circumcision with a comparable recovery and complication profile.

With the widespread dissemination of robotic surgical platforms, pathologies that were previously deemed challenging can now be treated more reliably with minimally invasive procedures via the robot. The advantages of precise articulation for dissection and suturing, tremor reduction, three-dimensional magnified visualization, and small incisions allow for the management of diverse lower urinary tract (LUT) disease. These may include recurrent or refractory bladder neck stenoses or intracorporeal urinary diversion with excellent perioperative and functional outcomes. Here, we review the recent literature comprising of developments in robotic-assisted LUT genitourinary reconstruction, with a view toward emerging technologies and future trends in techniques.

BACKGROUND:Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) following penile reconstruction in transgender, nonbinary, and other gender expansive (T/GE) populations has not previously been described, despite known risk factors in the population. Following T/GE penile reconstruction, care providers may underdiagnose STI without anatomically appropriate guidelines. METHODS:A detailed anonymous online survey of experiences of T/GE penile reconstruction patients was constructed with community input. Respondents were recruited from online support groups. RESULTS:128 T/GE people with experience of penile reconstruction responded to an anonymous survey posted in online support groups January to May 2020. Seven respondents (5.5%) self-reported one or more of the listed STIs at any point after penile reconstruction. All respondents with neourethras were diagnosed with localized STIs in nonurethral (extrapenile) locations only, and lack of vaginectomy was correlated with STI (p = 0.002). STIs were correlated with reporting sex with cisgender men (p = 0.001), transgender men (p = 0.009), and transgender women (p = 0.012). Of healthcare access variables, only receiving healthcare at a Community Health Center was correlated with STI history (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This exploratory survey indicates STI occurs after penile reconstruction in T/GE patients. Clinical confirmation is needed to identify specific risk factors and relative susceptibility of post-reconstruction anatomy to STIs. Given no previous surveillance recommendations for this population and the correlation of healthcare provider location with STI prevalence, underdiagnoses are likely. Based on the authors' clinical experience, we describe a urogenital screening algorithm following gender affirming penile reconstruction.