Saad Mohamed Saad Ibrahiem1. 1. Department of Plastic Surgery, Reconstructive Surgery, and Burn Management, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Champollion Street, El-Khartoum Square, Azarita Medical Campus, Alexandria, 21111, Egypt. saad.saad@alexmed.edu.eg.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Deformities after massive weight loss are usually severe and affect many parts of the body, negatively impacting patients' social and intimate lives. A common request of patients after massive weight loss is to treat more than one anatomical area in one surgical procedure. Advantages include a single recovery period, lower surgical costs, and faster patient satisfaction. Disadvantages may include increased need for blood transfusions, longer hospital stay, and increased risk of common complications. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of the study is to compare operative risk, hospital length of stay, complication rate, and patient satisfaction in MWLP according to the number of surgical procedures performed in the same surgical setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study of 653 MWLP who underwent multiple contouring procedures simultaneously in a single surgical procedure. All patients underwent surgery between 2016 and 2020. The patients studied were divided into 4 groups according to the number of anatomical areas operated on. RESULTS: A total of 1254 body contouring procedures were included in the study. Follow-up time ranged from 13 to 41 months, with a mean of 17 months. The mean age in the study was 33 years old. Women accounted for 78% of the studied population and men accounted for 22%. The overall complication rate (major and minor) was 105 cases (16.07%) in all groups CONCLUSION: Patient satisfaction was highest in patients who underwent 2-3 procedures within the same surgical setting compared to patients who underwent +3 procedures. Nevertheless, this is clinically insignificant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. 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 .
INTRODUCTION: Deformities after massive weight loss are usually severe and affect many parts of the body, negatively impacting patients' social and intimate lives. A common request of patients after massive weight loss is to treat more than one anatomical area in one surgical procedure. Advantages include a single recovery period, lower surgical costs, and faster patient satisfaction. Disadvantages may include increased need for blood transfusions, longer hospital stay, and increased risk of common complications. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of the study is to compare operative risk, hospital length of stay, complication rate, and patient satisfaction in MWLP according to the number of surgical procedures performed in the same surgical setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study of 653 MWLP who underwent multiple contouring procedures simultaneously in a single surgical procedure. All patients underwent surgery between 2016 and 2020. The patients studied were divided into 4 groups according to the number of anatomical areas operated on. RESULTS: A total of 1254 body contouring procedures were included in the study. Follow-up time ranged from 13 to 41 months, with a mean of 17 months. The mean age in the study was 33 years old. Women accounted for 78% of the studied population and men accounted for 22%. The overall complication rate (major and minor) was 105 cases (16.07%) in all groups CONCLUSION: Patient satisfaction was highest in patients who underwent 2-3 procedures within the same surgical setting compared to patients who underwent +3 procedures. Nevertheless, this is clinically insignificant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. 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 .
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Hannah G Lawman; Cheryl D Fryar; Deanna Kruszon-Moran; Brian K Kit; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-06-07 Impact factor: 56.272