ArticleEplasty2024
Maximizing Patient Satisfaction in Facial Feminizing Rhinoplasty.
Article in Eplasty, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although facial feminizing rhinoplasty can reduce gender dysphoria, there is limited evidence on approaches to maximize transgender patient satisfaction. In a retrospective cohort of transfeminine patients who underwent feminizing rhinoplasty, we compare pre- and postoperative nasal metrics and postoperative satisfaction. Methods: Records were retrospectively reviewed to identify transfeminine patients who had feminizing rhinoplasty and cisgender females who had aesthetic rhinoplasty at least 8 weeks post-rhinoplasty. Transgender patients were contacted to rate their aesthetic and functional rhinoplasty satisfaction. Patients with 75% or greater of the total survey score were "very satisfied," those between 50% and 75% were "satisfied," and those below 50% were "less satisfied." The Vectra 3D imaging software was utilized to measure each patient's pre- and post-rhinoplasty dorsal lengths; tip projection ratios; and nasolabial, nasofrontal, and nasofacial angles. Relative percent changes for each patient between pre- and post-rhinoplasty measurements were compared between transgender and cisgender females using descriptive statistics. Results: Twenty-five transgender patients met the inclusion criteria; 19 answered the survey with 12 very satisfied, 7 satisfied, and 0 less satisfied patients. The median age of surveyed patients was 35, and 42.1% identified as Hispanic. Between very satisfied and satisfied patients, median relative percent changes in dorsal length (-1.2% vs 5.7%, Conclusions: Very satisfied transgender patients had decreases in dorsal length, smaller increases in tip projection ratio, and decreases in the nasolabial angle compared with satisfied patients. These data can help focus feminizing rhinoplasty approaches to maximize satisfaction. Further, very satisfied transgender patients had similar changes as cisgender females, reaffirming the utility of applying cisgender female rhinoplasty considerations to feminizing rhinoplasty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38846499PMC11155344What 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.