ArticleTransgender health2025
Quality of Chest Masculinization in Trans Men: A Retrospective Study Evaluating Surgical Technique, Complications, Secondary Corrections, and Trends.
Article in Transgender health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This retrospective study reviews the quality of chest masculinization in transgender men in a single institute by elucidating factors impacting complications, secondary corrections, and trends over time. Methods: The data comprised all transgender men receiving chest masculinization in Helsinki University Hospital between 2005 and 2018. Data were collected from patient records. Complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Results: The study included 220 patients with a median age of 23 years. Periareolar techniques were used on 117 patients, double incision with pedicular relocation of nipple areolar complex on 60 patients, and double incision with free nipple grafts on 32 patients. Ten patients were operated with other techniques and one lacked surgical technique information. Surgically managed complications occurred in 15.4% and minor complications in 43.8%. Corrective surgery under general and local anesthesia was performed on 24.3% and 37.8%, respectively. Patients with minor complications were significantly older than reference patients. Surgical technique, comorbidities, body mass index, duration of hormonal treatment, and smoking were not associated to the development of complications or secondary corrections. The proceeding to genital surgery decreased clearly over time. Conclusion: We found no difference in outcomes between surgical techniques. The major complication rate was similar to previous studies. The numerous minor complications might be due to the systematic reporting. The high rate of secondary corrections could be explained with our publicly funded health care and including interventions made under local anesthesia. Patients undergoing chest masculinization should be informed regarding the risk of complications and corrective interventions.
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.