Differences in Complication Rates of Gluteoplasty Procedures That Utilize Autologous Fat Grafting, Implants, or Local Flaps

Derek B. Asserson, Andrea G. Kulinich, Hakan Orbay, David E. Sahar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gluteoplasty (gluteal augmentation) procedures are increasing in popularity, but there is not a universally accepted technique to produce optimal outcomes while minimizing risk. In this systematic review, we perform a meta-analysis to evaluate rates of complication from autologous fat grafting, implants, and local flaps, which are the three most common gluteoplasty operations. METHODS: A search of the PubMed/MEDLINE database for articles including the terms "gluteoplasty" OR "gluteal augmentation" OR "buttock augmentation" OR "Brazilian butt lift" OR "gluteal autologous fat graft" OR "buttock autologous fat graft" OR "gluteal implant" OR "buttock implant" OR "gluteal flap" OR "buttock flap" generated 229 articles. This number was brought down to 134 after initial screening by title. Inclusion criteria then removed those not written in English, those without access to the full text, those without extractable data on complications, and duplicates, leaving 46 articles to examine. RESULTS: A total of 4362 patients who underwent gluteoplasty between 1992 and 2017 were found. The overall complication rate was 12.4%. Implants had the highest rate (31.4%), whereas fat grafting had the lowest (6.8%); flaps were intermediate (23.1%). A χ test yielded a statistically significant (P < 0.001) nonindependent relationship between combined complication rate and type of surgery. Individual complications, such as asymmetry, capsular contracture, fat embolism, hematoma, infection, necrosis, pain, seroma, wide scar formation, and wound dehiscence, were also analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Fat grafting by plastic surgeons might be the best option for gluteoplasty with regard to complications. In certain cases, however, there may only exist one choice for an operation because of anatomical limitations, which predisposes patients to those associated complications.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)S342-S344
JournalAnnals of plastic surgery
Volume82
Issue number5S Suppl 4
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2019

Fingerprint

Buttocks
Fats
Fat Embolism
Transplants
Seroma
Contracture
PubMed
MEDLINE
Hematoma
Cicatrix
Meta-Analysis
Necrosis
Databases
Pain
Wounds and Injuries
Infection

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Differences in Complication Rates of Gluteoplasty Procedures That Utilize Autologous Fat Grafting, Implants, or Local Flaps. / Asserson, Derek B.; Kulinich, Andrea G.; Orbay, Hakan; Sahar, David E.

In: Annals of plastic surgery, Vol. 82, No. 5S Suppl 4, 01.05.2019, p. S342-S344.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Asserson, Derek B. ; Kulinich, Andrea G. ; Orbay, Hakan ; Sahar, David E. / Differences in Complication Rates of Gluteoplasty Procedures That Utilize Autologous Fat Grafting, Implants, or Local Flaps. In: Annals of plastic surgery. 2019 ; Vol. 82, No. 5S Suppl 4. pp. S342-S344.
@article{eee005c389ab4717929094119389a89a,
title = "Differences in Complication Rates of Gluteoplasty Procedures That Utilize Autologous Fat Grafting, Implants, or Local Flaps",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Gluteoplasty (gluteal augmentation) procedures are increasing in popularity, but there is not a universally accepted technique to produce optimal outcomes while minimizing risk. In this systematic review, we perform a meta-analysis to evaluate rates of complication from autologous fat grafting, implants, and local flaps, which are the three most common gluteoplasty operations. METHODS: A search of the PubMed/MEDLINE database for articles including the terms {"}gluteoplasty{"} OR {"}gluteal augmentation{"} OR {"}buttock augmentation{"} OR {"}Brazilian butt lift{"} OR {"}gluteal autologous fat graft{"} OR {"}buttock autologous fat graft{"} OR {"}gluteal implant{"} OR {"}buttock implant{"} OR {"}gluteal flap{"} OR {"}buttock flap{"} generated 229 articles. This number was brought down to 134 after initial screening by title. Inclusion criteria then removed those not written in English, those without access to the full text, those without extractable data on complications, and duplicates, leaving 46 articles to examine. RESULTS: A total of 4362 patients who underwent gluteoplasty between 1992 and 2017 were found. The overall complication rate was 12.4{\%}. Implants had the highest rate (31.4{\%}), whereas fat grafting had the lowest (6.8{\%}); flaps were intermediate (23.1{\%}). A χ test yielded a statistically significant (P < 0.001) nonindependent relationship between combined complication rate and type of surgery. Individual complications, such as asymmetry, capsular contracture, fat embolism, hematoma, infection, necrosis, pain, seroma, wide scar formation, and wound dehiscence, were also analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Fat grafting by plastic surgeons might be the best option for gluteoplasty with regard to complications. In certain cases, however, there may only exist one choice for an operation because of anatomical limitations, which predisposes patients to those associated complications.",
author = "Asserson, {Derek B.} and Kulinich, {Andrea G.} and Hakan Orbay and Sahar, {David E.}",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/SAP.0000000000001765",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "82",
pages = "S342--S344",
journal = "Annals of Plastic Surgery",
issn = "0148-7043",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5S Suppl 4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differences in Complication Rates of Gluteoplasty Procedures That Utilize Autologous Fat Grafting, Implants, or Local Flaps

AU - Asserson, Derek B.

AU - Kulinich, Andrea G.

AU - Orbay, Hakan

AU - Sahar, David E.

PY - 2019/5/1

Y1 - 2019/5/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: Gluteoplasty (gluteal augmentation) procedures are increasing in popularity, but there is not a universally accepted technique to produce optimal outcomes while minimizing risk. In this systematic review, we perform a meta-analysis to evaluate rates of complication from autologous fat grafting, implants, and local flaps, which are the three most common gluteoplasty operations. METHODS: A search of the PubMed/MEDLINE database for articles including the terms "gluteoplasty" OR "gluteal augmentation" OR "buttock augmentation" OR "Brazilian butt lift" OR "gluteal autologous fat graft" OR "buttock autologous fat graft" OR "gluteal implant" OR "buttock implant" OR "gluteal flap" OR "buttock flap" generated 229 articles. This number was brought down to 134 after initial screening by title. Inclusion criteria then removed those not written in English, those without access to the full text, those without extractable data on complications, and duplicates, leaving 46 articles to examine. RESULTS: A total of 4362 patients who underwent gluteoplasty between 1992 and 2017 were found. The overall complication rate was 12.4%. Implants had the highest rate (31.4%), whereas fat grafting had the lowest (6.8%); flaps were intermediate (23.1%). A χ test yielded a statistically significant (P < 0.001) nonindependent relationship between combined complication rate and type of surgery. Individual complications, such as asymmetry, capsular contracture, fat embolism, hematoma, infection, necrosis, pain, seroma, wide scar formation, and wound dehiscence, were also analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Fat grafting by plastic surgeons might be the best option for gluteoplasty with regard to complications. In certain cases, however, there may only exist one choice for an operation because of anatomical limitations, which predisposes patients to those associated complications.

AB - BACKGROUND: Gluteoplasty (gluteal augmentation) procedures are increasing in popularity, but there is not a universally accepted technique to produce optimal outcomes while minimizing risk. In this systematic review, we perform a meta-analysis to evaluate rates of complication from autologous fat grafting, implants, and local flaps, which are the three most common gluteoplasty operations. METHODS: A search of the PubMed/MEDLINE database for articles including the terms "gluteoplasty" OR "gluteal augmentation" OR "buttock augmentation" OR "Brazilian butt lift" OR "gluteal autologous fat graft" OR "buttock autologous fat graft" OR "gluteal implant" OR "buttock implant" OR "gluteal flap" OR "buttock flap" generated 229 articles. This number was brought down to 134 after initial screening by title. Inclusion criteria then removed those not written in English, those without access to the full text, those without extractable data on complications, and duplicates, leaving 46 articles to examine. RESULTS: A total of 4362 patients who underwent gluteoplasty between 1992 and 2017 were found. The overall complication rate was 12.4%. Implants had the highest rate (31.4%), whereas fat grafting had the lowest (6.8%); flaps were intermediate (23.1%). A χ test yielded a statistically significant (P < 0.001) nonindependent relationship between combined complication rate and type of surgery. Individual complications, such as asymmetry, capsular contracture, fat embolism, hematoma, infection, necrosis, pain, seroma, wide scar formation, and wound dehiscence, were also analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Fat grafting by plastic surgeons might be the best option for gluteoplasty with regard to complications. In certain cases, however, there may only exist one choice for an operation because of anatomical limitations, which predisposes patients to those associated complications.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064722652&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85064722652&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001765

DO - 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001765

M3 - Article

C2 - 30570567

AN - SCOPUS:85064722652

VL - 82

SP - S342-S344

JO - Annals of Plastic Surgery

JF - Annals of Plastic Surgery

SN - 0148-7043

IS - 5S Suppl 4

ER -