Abstract
PURPOSE: Genital gender-affirming surgery in transmasculine patients encompasses both metoidioplasty and phalloplasty. Some patients opt to undergo staged phalloplasty by metoidioplasty first (SPMF). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether SPMF is associated with less surgical complications compared with immediate phalloplasty (IP). METHODS: Our institutional database was retrospectively evaluated to identify transmasculine patients who underwent SPMF between 2006 and 2020. These patients were matched based on the type of flap (radial forearm free flap vs. anterolateral thigh flap) and for the time period in regard to patients who underwent IP. Both groups were compared on patient characteristics, perioperative and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with SPMF were matched with 27 IP patients. Median follow-up after phalloplasty was held, respectively, 32 and 33 months after the intervention for SPMF and IP (p=0.99). There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, and smoking habits between both groups. For SPMF, metoidioplasty required subsequent corrective surgery before phalloplasty in three patients (11%). For SPMF and IP, median operation time was 396 and 410 min (p=0.6), median hospital stay was 16 and 17 days (p=0.5), and median catheter stay was 19 and 20 days (p=0.9). In both groups, 16 patients (59%) needed at least one additional surgical procedure for postoperative complications, urethral complications (stricture, fistula), and/or flap-related complications. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, complications were not reduced by SPMF. In case metoidioplasty is considered as a step toward phalloplasty, separate morbidity of metoidioplasty must be taken into account.