Back

Simplified Drainless Outpatient Female-to-Male Gender-Affirming Bilateral Mastectomy

Knudson, S. A.; DeLeon, A.; Crane, C. N.; Santucci, R. A.

2022-06-21 surgery
10.1101/2022.06.19.22271559 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeFemale-to-male gender-affirming top surgery is growing in demand. We ventured to further improve double-incision free nipple graft bilateral mastectomy by utilizing a streamlined method of eliminating dead space and abandoning the practice of postoperative drain placement. MethodsPatients with gender dysphoria and who underwent streamlined gender-affirming top surgery without drain placement were retrospectively reviewed from August 2017 to June 2020. A literature review was conducted to identify comparative studies with historical complication data. Patient outcomes were analyzed against this aggregated data. ResultsOne-hundred and seven patients underwent 214 simplified double incision free nipple graft bilateral mastectomies in an outpatient surgery center. Mean patient age was 27.2 {+/-} 10.4 years. The overall complication rate was 13.1 percent. Hematoma occurred in 2 patients (1.9%). Seroma occurred in 10 patients (9.3%). Wound dehiscence occurred in 2 patients (1.9%). Elective revision rate was 3/107 (2.8%). One patient had acute reoperation due to major hematoma (0.9%). Compared with eleven studies of pooled historical outcomes of patients with drain placement, analysis revealed the drainless group had significantly higher rates of seroma (p = 0.003353), but significantly lower rates of revision (p = 1.37x10-12). Aggregation of our data with two past drainless studies was compared to the eleven drain inclusive studies, revealing significantly lower rates of hematoma (p = 0.001069), nipple areola complex necrosis (p = 0.01034), and revision (p = 2.20x10-16). ConclusionSimplified, drainless, outpatient double incision free nipple graft bilateral mastectomy can be performed with comparable outcomes to historical data.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.