87
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review Article

Quality of life outcomes in patients undergoing facial gender affirming surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

, , ORCID Icon, , , & show all
Published online: 20 Nov 2023
 

Abstract

Background: Facial gender-affirming surgery (FGAS), one of many transition-related surgeries (TRSs), “feminizes” the faces of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) patients undergoing transition. However, it is difficult to demonstrate the medical necessity of FGAS in terms of postoperative quality of life (QoL) outcomes due to a lack of standardized assessment tools. Thus, FGAS remains largely unsubsidized in North America.

Methods: A systematic review of online databases was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Screening and quality assessment was conducted by two independent blinded reviewers (KJ and GR). For statistical analysis, data from different Likert-scale-like questionnaires were extracted and coalesced into three-point scales on a data table of seven QoL domains; “Pre-” and “Postoperative femininity,” “Psychological satisfaction,” “Social Integration and Functioning,” “Aesthetic Satisfaction,” “Physical Health,” and “Satisfaction with Surgical Results.”

Results: From 2000 to 2022, 1837 patients and 3886 procedures from 19 studies were included. Weighted averages across all QoL domains reflected statistically significant improvement compared to neutral following FGAS (p < 0.001). Three studies used the same questionnaire, which showed that out of all eight questions regarding facial appearance, FGAS patients most strongly agreed the surgery was important to their ability to live as a woman (mean = 4.56/5, n = 137). Secondary outcomes showed the most common complications were hardware palpability (3.45%, n = 145) and aberrant scarring (2.17%, n = 423) with an overall revision rate of 2.17% (n = 423). The most common procedure was fronto-orbital remodeling.

Conclusion: FGAS significantly improves QoL with minimal risk to life and supports the literature in defining FGAS as a medically necessary procedure comparable to other TRSs.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 225.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.