Sex reassignment of transsexual people from a gynecologist's and urologist's perspective.

Cross-sex hormone treatment of transgender persons is usually uneventful, but hormone-sensitive malignancies of the (reproductive) organs of the natal and new sex (breasts, neovagina) may arise. Sex reassignment surgery impacts on the urodynamics of the reassigned sex. Pathology originating from organ systems of the natal sex may be overlooked in the new sex. In male-to-female transgender individuals, malignant tumors of the breasts and prostate may occur. Neovaginas are constructed with skin or sigmoid. Shortening of the male urethra to female dimensions is usually uneventful. In female-to-male transgender individuals breast cancer may develop, sometimes in residual mammary tissue after reductive mammoplasty. Malignancies of the vagina and ovaries are rare. Testosterone may be aromatized to estrogens, with effects on the endometrium. Lengthening of the female urethra to male dimensions may cause urethral fistulae, urethral strictures, and meatal stenoses. A degree of post-voiding incontinence may occur.

Survival of patients with early-stage cervical cancer after abdominal or laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: a nationwide cohort study and literature review.

AIM: Recently, the safety of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) has been called into question in early-stage cervical cancer. This study aimed to evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients treated with abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) and LRH for early-stage cervical cancer and to provide a literature review. METHODS: Patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2017 with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (2009) stage IA2 with lymphovascular space invasion, IB1 and IIA1, were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Cox regression with propensity score, based on inverse probability treatment weighting, was applied to examine the effect of surgical approach on 5-year survival and calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Literature review included observational studies with (i) analysis on tumours ≤4 cm (ii) median follow-up ≥30 months (iii) ≥5 events per predictor parameter in multivariable analysis or a propensity score. RESULTS: Of the 1109 patients, LRH was performed in 33%. Higher mortality (9.4% vs. 4.6%) and recurrence (13.1% vs. 7.3%) were observed in ARH than LRH. However, adjusted analyses showed similar DFS (89.4% vs. 90.2%), HR 0.92 [95% CI: 0.52-1.60]) and OS (95.2% vs. 95.5%), HR 0.94 [95% CI: 0.43-2.04]). Analyses on tumour size (<2/≥2 cm) also gave similar survival rates. Review of nine studies showed no distinct advantage of ARH, especially in tumours <2 cm. CONCLUSION: After adjustment, our retrospective study showed equal oncological outcomes between ARH and LRH for early-stage cervical cancer - also in tumours <2 cm. This is in correspondence with results from our literature review.