Carlo M Oranges1, Mathias Tremp1, Pietro G di Summa1, Martin Haug1, Daniel F Kalbermatten1, Yves Harder2, Dirk J Schaefer1. 1. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, Aesthetic, and Hand Surgery, Basel University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland. 2. Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano (ORL), Breast Centre of Switzerland (CSSI), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Lugano, Switzerland.
Abstract
Background: Many studies of gluteal augmentation techniques have been published in recent decades, including case reports, retrospective and prospective case series, and multicenter survey reviews. However, to date, there has been no study of the overall complications or satisfaction rates associated with the broad spectrum of techniques. Objectives: The authors performed a comprehensive literature review to determine outcomes and complications of gluteoplasty techniques, including patient satisfaction. Methods: A search on PubMed/Medline was performed for clinical studies involving gluteal augmentation techniques. A priori criteria were used to review the resulting articles. Results: Fifty-two studies, published from 1969 through 2015, were included - representing 7834 treated patients. Five gluteal augmentation techniques were identified from these studies: gluteal augmentation with implants (n = 4781), autologous fat grafting (n = 2609), local flaps (n = 369), hyaluronic acid gel injection (n = 69), and local tissue rearrangement (n = 6). The overall complication rates of the most commonly utilized techniques were: 30.5% for gluteal augmentation with implants, 10.5% for autologous fat grafting, and 22% for local flaps. Patients' satisfaction was reported as consistently high for all the five techniques. Conclusions: Implant-based gluteal augmentation is associated with high patients' satisfaction despite a high complication rate, while autologous fat grafting is associated with the lowest complication rate yet including serious major complications such as fat embolism. Local flaps and local tissue rearrangements are the ideal procedures in case of massive weight loss patients. A paucity of data is available for hyaluronic acid gel injections, which appear to be effective but temporary and expensive.
Background: Many studies of gluteal augmentation techniques have been published in recent decades, including case reports, retrospective and prospective case series, and multicenter survey reviews. However, to date, there has been no study of the overall complications or satisfaction rates associated with the broad spectrum of techniques. Objectives: The authors performed a comprehensive literature review to determine outcomes and complications of gluteoplasty techniques, including patient satisfaction. Methods: A search on PubMed/Medline was performed for clinical studies involving gluteal augmentation techniques. A priori criteria were used to review the resulting articles. Results: Fifty-two studies, published from 1969 through 2015, were included - representing 7834 treated patients. Five gluteal augmentation techniques were identified from these studies: gluteal augmentation with implants (n = 4781), autologous fat grafting (n = 2609), local flaps (n = 369), hyaluronic acid gel injection (n = 69), and local tissue rearrangement (n = 6). The overall complication rates of the most commonly utilized techniques were: 30.5% for gluteal augmentation with implants, 10.5% for autologous fat grafting, and 22% for local flaps. Patients' satisfaction was reported as consistently high for all the five techniques. Conclusions: Implant-based gluteal augmentation is associated with high patients' satisfaction despite a high complication rate, while autologous fat grafting is associated with the lowest complication rate yet including serious major complications such as fat embolism. Local flaps and local tissue rearrangements are the ideal procedures in case of massive weight losspatients. A paucity of data is available for hyaluronic acid gel injections, which appear to be effective but temporary and expensive.
Authors: Alexander Leyva; Tri Tran; Andrew T Cibulas; David Warden; Franklin J Danger; Kurt Scherer; Christopher Wasyliw Journal: Cureus Date: 2018-09-13