ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2021
Imaging evaluation for the diagnosis and management of complications of gender-affirming surgeries.
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- MR imaging of penile pathology and prostheses.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Imaging the acute complications of gender-affirming surgeries: a primer for radiologists in the emergency setting.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Review
- Gynecological Fistulae-Has Anything Changed in the Diagnosis and Treatment over the Last Decade? A Narrative Literature Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gender-affirming surgeries (GS) allow transgender individuals to align their physical sexual characteristics with their gender identity, which can result in profound changes to native anatomy. Medical imaging is a useful tool for evaluation of patients who have undergone or plan to pursue GS. Given the complex nature of some GS, complications may arise. The choice of imaging modality can be guided by the clinically suspected complications. For example, urethral complications of phalloplasty are best evaluated with fluoroscopic urethrography. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging provides detailed depiction of pelvic neo-anatomy after vaginoplasty. Many GS involve the creation of vascular pedicles for tissue grafts, which are at risk of thrombosis and graft ischemia. Doppler ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) angiography are important for diagnosis of these dreaded complications. Moreover, interventional radiologists may participate in endovascular treatments for such complications. Various imaging modalities may assist the surgeon in the postoperative evaluation of patients with suspected complications after GS, and imaging protocol modifications may be required to improve diagnostic accuracy. For example, rectal or neovaginal contrast material may be necessary to ensure accurate imaging evaluation, such as delineation of fistulas. Working together, surgeons and radiologists can ensure accurate imaging assessment while accommodating for patient comfort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.