背景:寻求确认性别的阴茎成形术的变性男性(TM)和寻求阴道成形术和希望插入性交的变性女性(TW)必须考虑阴茎的大小。有证据表明,至少在顺性男性(CM)中,阴茎尺寸往往估计不好。在希望进行性别确认手术的变性患者中,阴茎尺寸估计的不准确可能导致不必要的发病率:对于TW,新阴道创伤;对于周长过大的TM,无法插入。关于变性者和顺性者患者估计阴茎大小的准确性的研究有限。
目的:为了评估CM和CW的准确度,以及TM和TW,视觉估计人类阴茎的大小,包括长度,宽度,和腰围。
方法:纳入142名参与者(25TM,47TW,30厘米,和40CW;净平均值±SD年龄,36.6±11.2年)。向参与者展示了这些模型,并要求他们估计长度,宽度,通过目视检查6种不同长度和宽度的阴茎和阴囊的真实模型和中轴周长。我们通过将平均感知尺寸与每个模型的实际尺寸进行比较来评估视觉测量的准确性。
结果:我们使用了所有3个偏差维度的多变量模型来检验性别组之间平均偏差的差异(CM,CW,TM,和TW)。
结果:TM在最长模型中明显高估了长度。在较长的3个模型中,TW明显高估了长度。除TM外,所有组均在至少1个模型中明显低估了周长。没有组明显低估宽度。CM,CW,在所有6个模型中,TM和TM都大大高估了宽度。
结论:当变性人患者使用数字来表达阴茎大小时(根据感知的伴侣大小,以新生阴茎或阴道深度表示),结果可能比预期的要大。使用真实的阴茎模型作为决策工具可以帮助管理患者的期望和术前的手术决策,并提高术后患者的满意度和安全性。
■据我们所知,这是第一项评估TM和CM中阴茎大小的视觉估计的研究,以及TW和CW。我们研究中的阴茎模型并排显示,尽管尺寸与勃起阴茎更加一致,但仍处于松弛状态。这可能影响了所有维度的估计。
结论:男性和女性(顺性和变性者)倾向于显著高估阴茎的长度和宽度。
BACKGROUND: Transgender men (TM) seeking gender-affirming phalloplasty and transgender women (TW) seeking vaginoplasty and desiring insertive intercourse must consider penis size. Evidence has shown that, at least among cisgender men (CM), penile dimensions tend to be poorly estimated. In transgender patients desiring gender-affirming surgery, inaccuracy in estimation of penis dimensions may lead to unnecessary morbidity: for TW, trauma to the neovagina; for TM with excess girth, an inability to insert. Studies on the accuracy with which transgender and cisgender patients estimate penis size are limited.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree of accuracy with which CM and CW, as well as TM and TW, visually estimate the size of the human penis, including length, width, and girth.
METHODS: There were 142 participants included (25 TM, 47 TW, 30 CM, and 40 CW; net mean ± SD age, 36.6 ± 11.2 years). Participants were shown these models and asked to estimate length, width, and midshaft girth by visual inspection of 6 realistic models of a penis and scrotum of varying lengths and widths. We evaluated the accuracy of the visual measurements by comparing mean perceived dimensions with the actual dimensions of each model.
RESULTS: We used a multivariate model of all 3 bias dimensions to test for differences in average bias among gender groups (CM, CW, TM, and TW).
RESULTS: TM significantly overestimated length across the longest models. TW significantly overestimated length in the longer 3 models. All groups except for TM significantly underestimated girth in at least 1 model. No groups significantly underestimated width. CM, CW, and TM significantly overestimated width in all 6 models.
CONCLUSIONS: When transgender patients use numbers to express penis size (either in neophallus or vaginal depth based on perceived partner size), the result is likely to be larger than expected. Use of realistic penis models as a decision-making tool may help manage patient expectations and surgery decision making preoperatively and improve postoperative patient satisfaction and safety.
UNASSIGNED: To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess visual estimation in penis size in TM and CM, as well as TW and CW. The penile models in our study were shown side by side and in the flaccid state despite having dimensions more consistent with an erect penis, which may have influenced estimations across all dimensions.
CONCLUSIONS: Men and women (cisgender and transgender) tend to significantly overestimate penis length and width.