Patient-reported satisfaction and health-related quality of life after chest masculinization in transgender men using the BODY-Q Chest module and the 15D instrument.

Chest masculinization is the most common surgical intervention in transgender men. Studies indicate good patient-reported postoperative satisfaction, but only recently has a patient-reported outcome instrument, the BODY-Q Chest module, been developed and validated for this patient group. This study aimed to evaluate postoperative patient-reported satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the BODY-Q Chest module and the 15D after surgical chest masculinization in transgender men. The data comprised all patients receiving chest masculinization from 2005 to 2018. The patients were invited by letter to complete the BODY-Q Chest module and the 15D questionnaire in May 2020. Of the 220 patients invited, 123 completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 56%. The median chest and nipple scores were 76 and 68 out of 100, respectively. The number of secondary corrections was negatively associated with the chest score (p value < 0.001). The 15D index score was lower compared with the age-standardized male population (p value < 0.001), but similar to the age-standardized female population. Psychiatric comorbidity was associated with lower 15D index scores (p value < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between the BODY-Q Chest module scores or the 15D index score among the different surgical techniques. The postoperative satisfaction with chest masculinization was good and in line with previous literature. HRQoL resembles that of the reference population. The periareolar technique is not associated with better satisfaction despite causing less scar burden. The negative association between the chest score and number of secondary corrections is unsettling and requires further examination in a prospective setting.

Validation of the BODY-Q Chest module in Finnish trans men undergoing chest wall masculinization.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of gender affirmation surgery is to ease gender dysphoria. In transgender men, chest wall masculinization is the most common gender affirmation surgery. The BODY-Q Chest module is currently the only instrument developed to measure health-related quality of life (HRQL) in men undergoing chest wall surgery. Linguistic validation and cultural adaption to Finnish were performed previously. The study aims to validate the BODY-Q Chest module in transgender men who have undergone surgical chest wall masculinization. METHODS: All transgender patients who underwent chest wall masculinization at Helsinki University Hospital between 2005 and 2018 were invited to the study. The BODY-Q Chest module comprises two scales-chest and nipple. Data were obtained using the BODY-Q Chest module, the 15D questionnaire, and specifically targeted items designed by the authors. The statistical analyses were conducted to exclude selection bias, evaluate validity of the instrument, and compare it to other instruments. RESULTS: Of the 220 patients invited, 123 participated in the survey (response rate 56%). Ceiling effects were observed with 18.9% and 20.5% scoring maximum points. Cronbach's alpha was 0.92 and 0.88 for the chest and nipple scales, respectively. In exploratory factor analysis, both scales loaded to one factor confirming unidimensionality. Correlation with the generic 15D questionnaire was low. CONCLUSIONS: The BODY-Q Chest module provides valid scores with sufficient consistency and reliability when measuring HRQL in transgender men undergoing chest wall masculinization. Moreover, it offers specificity that existing or generic instruments cannot provide. Ceiling effect was expected due to the postoperative status of participants.

Preoperative breast imaging and histopathological findings in chest contouring surgery on transmen.

BACKGROUND: Chest contouring is the most common surgical procedure transmen receive. Only a few articles discuss the importance of preoperative imaging and postoperative histopathological analysis of excised breast tissue. We studied the findings of preoperative breast imaging and the results of postoperative histopathological analysis in a clinical setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 220 patients were collected retrospectively from 2005 to 2018. Preoperative imaging modalities and their findings were recorded and classified according to the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. The histopathological findings in breast specimens were categorized based on the World Health Organization Classification of Breast Tumors (5th edition). RESULTS: Preoperative imaging was performed in 133 (60.5%) patients. Patients in the ultrasound-only group were younger (mean age 22.8) than the other groups (mammogram (MGR) 37 years and MGR+US 35.5 years). Preoperative imaging results were normal in 131 (98.5%) patients. Two patients needed further evaluation. Histopathological results were available on 206 (93.6%) patients. The most common histopathological findings were fibrosis (67.5%), atrophy (34.3%), and chronic mastopathy (14.5%). There were no high-risk or malignant findings. CONCLUSIONS: The need for further examinations based on routine preoperative imaging was low (1.5%). Therefore, more individualized patient selection for preoperative imaging is justified. There were no high-risk or malignant findings in histopathological analysis, and the occurrence of benign findings was similar to that reported in previous studies. Despite our findings, based on current knowledge, histopathological examination of excised breast tissue can still be recommended. Therefore, future studies are needed to define clear guidelines.