Isotretinoin Use in Transmasculine Patients and Its Implication on Chest Masculinization Surgery: Scoping Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acne often worsens in transmasculine patients who are on prolonged testosterone therapy. Isotretinoin is an oral retinoid used in the treatment of severe or refractory cases of acne, but it has the potential to cause delayed wound healing. Transmasculine patients may potentially be prescribed treatment for acne with isotretinoin while also planning to undergo chest masculinization surgery. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to determine whether isotretinoin has a negative impact on postoperative healing in transmasculine patients undergoing chest masculinization surgery. METHODS: A scoping review was performed using the PubMed and Ovid databases. A total of 16 publications were selected for inclusion. RESULTS: Acne tends to peak in transmasculine patients 6 months after initiation of testosterone treatment. Severe cases can be treated with isotretinoin; however, acne may recur once treatment is discontinued, given ongoing hormone therapy. There is little to no evidence in the medical literature regarding perioperative use of isotretinoin specifically among transmasculine patients undergoing chest masculinization surgery. In general, however, recent studies have found no evidence of increased hypertrophic scars or keloids in patients taking isotretinoin. CONCLUSIONS: Further studies are required to strengthen the current evidence that suggests that isotretinoin does not need to be discontinued before or after incisional or excisional surgeries, including chest masculinization surgery in transmasculine patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".