Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2020
Setbacks in Forehead Feminization Cranioplasty: A Systematic Review of Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Eggerstedt Michael, Hong Young Soo, Wakefield Connor J, Westrick Jennifer, Smith Ryan M, Revenaugh Peter C
Аннотация
IMPORTANCE: Forehead feminization cranioplasty (FFC) is an important component of gender-affirming surgery and has become increasingly popular in recent years. Little objective evidence exists for the procedure's safety and clinical impact via patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).
OBJECTIVE: To determine what complications are observed following FFC, the relative frequency of complications by surgical technique, and what impact the procedure has on patient's quality of life.
DATA SOURCES: Database searches were performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PsycINFO. The search terms included variations of forehead setback/FFC. Both controlled vocabularies (i.e., MeSH and CINAHL's Suggested Subject Terms) and keywords in the title or abstract fields were searched.
STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers screened the titles and abstracts of all articles. Two independent surgeon reviewers evaluated the full text of all included articles, and relevant data points were extracted.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Complications and complication rate observed following FFC. Additional outcome measures were the approach utilized, concurrent procedures performed, and the use and findings of a PROM.
RESULTS: Ten articles describing FFC were included, encompassing 673 patients. The overall pooled complication rate was 1.3%. PROMs were used in half of studies, with no standardization among studies.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Complications following FFC are rare and infrequently require reoperation. Further studies into standardized and validated PROMs in facial feminization patients are warranted.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
OBJECTIVE: To determine what complications are observed following FFC, the relative frequency of complications by surgical technique, and what impact the procedure has on patient's quality of life.
DATA SOURCES: Database searches were performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PsycINFO. The search terms included variations of forehead setback/FFC. Both controlled vocabularies (i.e., MeSH and CINAHL's Suggested Subject Terms) and keywords in the title or abstract fields were searched.
STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers screened the titles and abstracts of all articles. Two independent surgeon reviewers evaluated the full text of all included articles, and relevant data points were extracted.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Complications and complication rate observed following FFC. Additional outcome measures were the approach utilized, concurrent procedures performed, and the use and findings of a PROM.
RESULTS: Ten articles describing FFC were included, encompassing 673 patients. The overall pooled complication rate was 1.3%. PROMs were used in half of studies, with no standardization among studies.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Complications following FFC are rare and infrequently require reoperation. Further studies into standardized and validated PROMs in facial feminization patients are warranted.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.