Determining the Safety and Efficacy of Gluteal Augmentation: A Systematic Review of Outcomes and Complications
- 1 April 2016
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
- Vol. 137 (4), 1151-1156
- https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000002005
Abstract
Augmentation gluteoplasty has been performed more frequently in the past decade, with over 21,000 procedures performed in the past year alone. The most popular methods for buttock augmentation involve silicone prostheses and autologous fat grafting. A comparison of complications of these two techniques does not exist in our literature. The PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases were searched through April of 2015 for studies that achieved buttock augmentation through the use of silicone implant placement or autologous lipoinjection. Complication outcomes of interest included wound dehiscence, infection, seroma, hematoma, asymmetry, and capsular contracture. Forty-four articles met inclusion criteria. The most commonly reported complications in 2375 patients receiving silicone implants were wound dehiscence (9.6 percent), seroma (4.6 percent), infection (1.9 percent), and transient sciatic paresthesias (1.0 percent), with an overall complication rate of 21.6 percent (n = 512). The most commonly reported complications in 3567 patients receiving autologous fat injection were seroma (3.5 percent), undercorrection (2.2 percent), infection (2.0 percent), and pain or sciatalgia (1.7 percent), with an overall complication rate of 9.9 percent (n = 353). Patient satisfaction after surgery was assessed differently among studies and could not be compared quantitatively. Although gluteal augmentation was once reported to have complication rates as high as 38.1 percent, a systematic review of the two most popular techniques demonstrated substantially lower overall complication rates. The overall complication rate with autologous fat grafting (9.9 percent) is lower than that with silicone buttock implants (21.6 percent). A standardized method of measuring patient satisfaction is necessary to fully understand outcomes of these increasingly popular procedures.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Gluteal Augmentation with Fat GraftingClinics in Plastic Surgery, 2015
- Volumetric and Functional Evaluation of the Gluteus Maximus Muscle after Augmentation Gluteoplasty Using Silicone ImplantsPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2015
- Gluteal Implant DisplacementPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2014
- Surgical Pocket Location for Gluteal Implants: A Systematic ReviewAesthetic Plastic Surgery, 2013
- Gluteal augmentation surgery: indications and surgical managementJournal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, 2007
- History of Gluteal AugmentationClinics in Plastic Surgery, 2006
- Buttock Augmentation: Case Studies of Fat Injection Monitored by Magnetic Resonance ImagingPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2004
- Augmentation of the buttocks by micro fat graftingAesthetic Surgery Journal, 2001
- Fat grafting of the buttocks and lower limbsAesthetic Plastic Surgery, 1996
- Fat injection: Long-term follow-upAesthetic Plastic Surgery, 1996