SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2026
The Impact of Testosterone Supplementation on Surgical Complications in Gender-Affirming Mastectomy: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients seeking gender-affirming surgery are usually on hormone supplementation. We hypothesized that perioperative testosterone therapy increases hematoma following chest masculinizing surgery.
methodsMeta-analysis was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies with perioperative hormone status and surgical outcomes were included. Patient characteristics, testosterone use, surgical details, and outcomes were extracted. Meta-analysis and pooled analysis using aggregated patient-level data were conducted.
resultsFifteen studies were included, comprising 3,036 testosterone-treatment (TT) and 726 non-testosterone-treatment (NTT) patients. Overall complication rates were similar (11.08% vs. 9.80%; p = 0.29). Meta-analysis showed significantly higher hematoma in TT (OR 1.99, [1.19-3.34], p < 0.001). Other complications showed no significant differences: infection (OR 0.33 [0.07-1.59]), wound dehiscence (OR 0.68 [0.04-11.06]), seroma (OR 0.5 [0.15-1.57]), and venous thromboembolism (OR 0.20 [0.0-10.42]). Hematoma risk did not differ between patients who continued versus stopped testosterone (TT-C 8.73% vs. TT-S 7.80%; p = 0.54), or by cessation timing (p = 0.60). Mixed-effects meta-regression found incision type was not a significant moderator of hematoma (QM (1) = 0.34, p = 0.56) among TT and NTT. Without stratifying by testosterone, hematoma rates were higher with limited incisions than extended incisions (11.96% vs. 6.5%; p < 0.01).
conclusionsTestosterone therapy was associated with higher postoperative hematoma rates, while perioperative cessation did not reduce hematoma or overall complications. These findings support heightened perioperative awareness and vigilance for hematoma risk in patients receiving testosterone, while decisions regarding the timing of hormone therapy initiation should be carefully weighed against established mental health benefits. 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 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.