Top

03-02-2025 | Fat Grafting | Original Articles

Comparison of Complication Rates of Different Autologous Gluteal Augmentation Techniques in 185 Consecutive Body Lift Surgeries in Massive Weight Loss Patients

Authors: Özay Özkaya, Ayça Ergan Şahin

Abstract

Introduction

Patients who experience massive weight loss often face extensive circumferential truncal deformities, including buttock deflation. Body lift surgery is an effective method for regaining body shape, and concomitant gluteal augmentation addresses deformed buttocks. This study aimed to compare complication rates among different gluteal autoaugmentation techniques.

Methods

A total of 273 patients were operated on between 2019 and 2024. Of these, 185 patients with complete records and follow-up for at least 3 months were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups: Those with a body lift with combined autoaugmentation and those without. In addition, the gluteal autoaugmentation group was divided into three groups according to the gluteal autoaugmentation technique: lipofilling, deepidermised fasciocutaneous island flap and deepidermised fasciocutaneous transposition flap groups.

Results

No major complications were recorded in either group. There was no statistically significant difference in complications between patients who underwent concomitant gluteal autoaugmentation and those who did not. The early complication rates in the lipofilling and transposition flap groups were statistically significantly higher than in the island flap group (p < 0.05), while the lipofilling and transposition flap groups did not show any statistically significant difference (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Gluteal autoaugmentation with flaps is a safe procedure with minimal complication rates. Combining body lift surgery with gluteal augmentation techniques such as island or transposition flaps or lipofilling does not increase the risk of complications.

Level of Evidence I

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. 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.

Available only for authorised users

Schmitt T, Jabbour S, Makhoul R, Noel W, Reguesse AS, Levan P. Lower body lift in the massive weight loss patient: a new classification and algorithm for gluteal augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(3):625–36. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004178. (PMID: 29135892).CrossRefPubMed

Sozer SO, Agullo FJ, Palladino H. Spiral lift: medial and lateral thigh lift with buttock lift and augmentation. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2008;32(1):120–5.CrossRefPubMed

Le Louarn C, Pascal JF. Autologous gluteal augmentation after massive weight loss. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(4):1515–6; author reply 1516.

Centeno RF. Autologous gluteal augmentation. Clin Plast Surg. 2006;33:479–96.CrossRefPubMed

Pascal JF, Le Louarn C. Remodeling bodylift with high lateral tension. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2002;26:223–30.CrossRef

Sozer SO, Erhan EO. Autologous flap gluteal augmentation: split gluteal flap technique. Clin Plast Surg. 2018;45(2):269–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cps.2017.12.007. (Epub 2018 Feb 3 PMID: 29519495).CrossRefPubMed

Rohde C, Gerut Z. Augmentation buttock-pexy using autologous tissue following massive weight loss. Aesthet Surg J. 2005;25:576–81.CrossRefPubMed

Antoine de Runz A, Brix M, Gisquet H, Pujo J, Minetti C, Colson T, Sorin T, Agrinier N, Simon E. Satisfaction and complications after lower body lift with autologous gluteal augmentation by island fat flap: 55 case series over 3 years. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(3):410–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2014.10.043.CrossRefPubMed

Almutairi K, Gusenoff JA, Rubin JP. Body contouring. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(3):586e–602e.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Carloni R, De Runz A, Chaput B, Herlin C, Girard P, Watier E, Bertheuil N. Circumferential contouring of the lower trunk: indications, operative techniques, and outcomes – a systematic review. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2016;40(5):652–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-016-0660-7. Epub 2016 Jun 10. Erratum in: Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2016 Oct;40(5):669. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-016-0677-y. PMID: 27286851.

12.

Asserson DB, Kulinich AG, Orbay H, Sahar DE. Differences in complication rates of gluteoplasty procedures that utilize autologous fat grafting, implants, or local flaps. Ann Plast Surg. 2019;82(4):S342–4. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001765.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Michaels J, Coon D, Rubin JP. Complications in post-bariatric body contouring: strategies for assessment and prevention. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127(3):1352–7.CrossRefPubMed

14.

García Botero A, García Wenninger M, Fernández LD. Complications after body contouring surgery in postbariatric patients. Ann Plast Surg. 2017;79(3):293–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001109.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Oranges CM, Tremp M, di Summa PG, Haug M, Kalbermatten DF, Harder Y, Schaefer DJ. Gluteal augmentation techniques: a comprehensive literature review. Aesthet Surg J. 2017;37(5):560–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjw240.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Shah B. Complications in gluteal augmentation. Clin Plast Surg. 2018;45(2):179–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cps.2017.12.001. (PMID: 29519486).CrossRefPubMed

17.

Nicareta B, Pereira LH, Sterodimas A, Illouz YG. Autologous gluteal lipograft. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2011;35(2):216–24.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Srivastava U, Rubin JP, Gusenoff JA. Lower body lift after massive weight loss: autoaugmentation versus no augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135(3):762–72. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000001043. (PMID: 25719695).CrossRefPubMed

19.

Levan P, Bassilios HS. Gluteal implants versus autologous flaps in patients with postbariatric surgery weight loss: a prospective comparative study of 3-dimensional gluteal projection after lower body lift. Aesthet Surg J. 2017;37(9):1012–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjx033. (PMID: 28398515).CrossRefPubMed

20.

Clavijo-Alvarez JA, Pannucci CJ, Oppenheimer AJ, Wilkins EG, Rubin JP. Prevention of venous thromboembolism in body contouring surgery: a national survey of 596 ASPS surgeons. Ann Plast Surg. 2011;66(3):228–32. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181e35c64.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Coon D, Michaels J 5th, Gusenoff JA, Chong T, Purnell C, Rubin JP. Hypothermia and complications in postbariatric body contouring. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130(2):443–48. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182589ede. PMID: 22842417.

Title: Comparison of Complication Rates of Different Autologous Gluteal Augmentation Techniques in 185 Consecutive Body Lift Surgeries in Massive Weight Loss Patients
Authors: Özay Özkaya
Ayça Ergan Şahin
Publication date: 03-02-2025
Publisher: Springer US
Keywords: Fat Grafting
Body Lifting
Body Lifting
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-024-04654-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on adolescent vaping

Springer Medicine

Comparison of Complication Rates of Different Autologous Gluteal Augmentation Techniques in 185 Consecutive Body Lift Surgeries in Massive Weight Loss Patients

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of Evidence I

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on adolescent vaping

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of Evidence I

Please log in to get access to this content