3.9 Review

Near-circumferential Lower Body Lift: A Review of 40 Outpatient Procedures

Journal

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002548

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Lower body lift surgery has increased in popularity. A circumferential body lift or belt lipectomy is often recommended to treat skin redundancy. A drawback for this procedure is the midline scar bridging the lower back causing elongation of the gluteal cleft. Autoaugmentation methods have not been shown to provide a net increase in buttock volume. Methods: A retrospective study was undertaken among 40 consecutive women and men undergoing near-circumferential outer thigh and buttock lifts, including 21 lower body lifts (with abdominoplasty). All procedures were performed by the author as outpatients, under total intravenous anesthesia, without muscle relaxation and without prone positioning. Most patients (80%) had liposuction. Fourteen patients had simultaneous inner thigh lifts. Buttock fat transfer was used in 13 patients. Most patients had simultaneous cosmetic procedures of the face or breasts. Results: Fourteen patients (35%) experienced complications. One patient developed a deep venous thrombosis, detected by routine ultrasound screening on the day after surgery. Local complications included 3 patients with seromas (8%), 2 wound dehiscences (5%), and 1 infection (3%). Three patients (8%) returned for secondary outer thigh lifts. There were no complications related to fat injections. Conclusions: The near-circumferential lower body lift may he performed in healthy outpatients with attention to safe anesthesia, normothermia, limited blood loss, and operating times <6 hours. A scar across the posterior midline may be avoided. hat injection safely restores glutcal volume. Secondary surgery may be recommended to treat persistent skin laxity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available