Literature DB >> 23375962

Surgical reconstruction for male-to-female sex reassignment.

Bastian Amend1, Joerg Seibold, Patricia Toomey, Arnulf Stenzl, Karl-Dietrich Sievert.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The primary challenge of male-to-female reassignment surgery is to create natural-appearing female genitalia with neovaginal dimensions adequate for intercourse, neoclitoris sensitivity, and minimal risk of complications. Surgical positioning is an important component of the procedure that successfully minimizes the risk of morbidity.
OBJECTIVE: We modified various vaginoplasty techniques to better position the urethral neomeatus in the proper anatomic location to minimize the chance for complications and enhance aesthetic satisfaction. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We retrospectively reviewed data stored in a prospective database for 24 consecutive patients who underwent male-to-female gender reassignment at a German university clinic between January 2007 and March 2011. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: First, orchiectomy and penile disassembly are performed with the patient in the supine position. Both corpora cavernosa are resected with the patient in the lithotomy position, and neovaginal construction is accomplished with the incorporation of the penile urethra into the penile shaft skin. The glans is preserved and resized to form the neoclitoris. The assembled neovagina is inverted, inserted into the expanded rectoprostatic space, and secured to the sacrospinous ligament. Scrotal skin is tailored to create the labia. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Complications and patient satisfaction with neovaginal depth, appearance, neoclitoral sensation, and capacity for sexual intercourse were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The mean neovaginal depth was 11cm (range: 10-14cm); median follow-up was 39.7 mo (range: 19-69 mo). All patients reported satisfactory vaginal functionality. One patient noted stenosis after 4 yr that was histologically confirmed as lichen sclerosus. Neoclitoral sensation was good or excellent in 97% of patients; 33% reported regular intercourse. No major complications were observed. Because this is a retrospective review to describe a complex reconstructive surgery and illustrate these techniques in the accompanying intraoperative surgery-in-motion video, no control group was undertaken.
CONCLUSIONS: Gender reassignment can be performed with minimal complications using penile skin with incorporated penile urethra and intraoperative repositioning of the patient to achieve adequate neovaginal dimensions for intercourse and neoclitoral sensation.
Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23375962     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.12.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  13 in total

Review 1.  Gender-Affirming Surgery: Current Concepts.

Authors:  Shu Pan; Stanton C Honig
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  Dermatologic Conditions in Transgender Populations.

Authors:  Howa Yeung; Benjamin Kahn; Bao Chau Ly; Vin Tangpricha
Journal:  Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.741

Review 3.  Surgical satisfaction and quality of life outcomes reported by transgender men and women at least one year post gender-affirming surgery: A systematic literature review.

Authors:  Christienne Javier; Charlie R Crimston; Fiona Kate Barlow
Journal:  Int J Transgend Health       Date:  2022-03-18

4.  Gender Dysphoria and Its Non-Surgical and Surgical Treatments.

Authors:  Danyon Anderson; Himasa Wijetunge; Peyton Moore; Daniel Provenzano; Nathan Li; Jamal Hasoon; Omar Viswanath; Alan D Kaye; Ivan Urits
Journal:  Health Psychol Res       Date:  2022-09-23

5.  Satisfaction with male-to-female gender reassignment surgery.

Authors:  Jochen Hess; Roberto Rossi Neto; Leo Panic; Herbert Rübben; Wolfgang Senf
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 6.  Reconstructive Management Pearls for the Transgender Patient.

Authors:  Geolani W Dy; Jeff Sun; Michael A Granieri; Lee C Zhao
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 7.  Urethral complications after gender reassignment surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  N Nassiri; M Maas; M Basin; G E Cacciamani; L R Doumanian
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 2.896

8.  Complications and Patient-reported Outcomes in Transfemale Vaginoplasty: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Samyd S Bustos; Valeria P Bustos; Andres Mascaro; Pedro Ciudad; Antonio J Forte; Gabriel Del Corral; Oscar Javier Manrique
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2021-03-19

Review 9.  An overview of neovaginal reconstruction options in male to female transsexuals.

Authors:  Marta Bizic; Vladimir Kojovic; Dragana Duisin; Dusan Stanojevic; Svetlana Vujovic; Aleksandar Milosevic; Gradimir Korac; Miroslav L Djordjevic
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2014-05-26

10.  Application of embryonic equivalents in male-to-female sex reassignment surgery.

Authors:  Balakrishnan Margabandu Thalaivirithan; Maithreyi Sethu; Dinesh Karuvakkurichi Ramachandran; Mahadevan Kandasamy; Jaganmohan Janardhanam
Journal:  Indian J Plast Surg       Date:  2018 May-Aug
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.