Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
INTRODUCTION: Testicular prosthesis implantation may be used for neoscrotal augmentation in transgender men. AIM: Assess the clinical outcomes and risk factors for postoperative complications of this procedure in transgender men. METHODS: All transgender men who underwent neoscrotal augmentation with testicular implants between January 1992 and December 2018 were retrospectively identified. A retrospective chart study was performed that recorded surgical characteristics and postoperative complications. Risk factors on complications were identified using uni- and multivariate analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Surgical outcomes included explantation due to infection, extrusion, discomfort, or leakage. RESULTS: We identified 206 patients, and the following prostheses were placed: Dow Corning (n = 22), Eurosilicone (n = 2), Nagor (n = 205), Polytech (n = 10), Promedon (n = 105) , Prometel (n = 22), Sebbin (n = 44), and unknown (n = 2). The mean clinical follow-up time was 11.5 ± 8.3 years. In 43 patients (20.8%), one or both prostheses were explanted due to infection, extrusion, discomfort, prosthesis leakage, or urethral problems. Currently, scrotoplasty according to Hoebeke is the most frequently performed technique. Our review found that for this technique explantation occurred in 6 of 52 patients (11.5%). A history of smoking was a risk factor for postoperative infections and prosthesis explantation. In earlier years, larger prostheses were immediately placed at scrotal reconstruction; however, a trend can be seen toward smaller and lighter testicular prostheses and delayed implantation. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patients wanting to undergo this procedure can be adequately informed on postoperative outcomes. STRENGTHS 16:1664-1671.
Pigot et al. (2019) studied this question.