Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Blood Loss in Third-Generation Internal Ultrasound-Assisted Liposuction

  • Original Articles
  • Body Contouring
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In large-volume liposuction procedures, one of the most important limitations of total lipoaspirate volume is blood loss. In this study, we aimed to determine the amount of blood loss in individuals who underwent a third-generation internal ultrasound-assisted liposuction (UAL).

Methods

Eleven female and eleven male participants with a mean age of 35.31 (range 20–47) were included in this prospective study. The third-generation internal UAL was performed on multiple anatomical regions using the VASER® Internal Ultrasound Device (Sound Surgical Technologies; Louisville, CO). The demographic characteristics of the participants, the amount of aspirate collected, and hemoglobin (Hgb) and hematocrit (Htc) values before and after the third-generation internal UAL were evaluated.

Results

The mean third-generation internal UAL time was 74.81 ± 17.95 minutes, and the mean aspiration amount was 5,122.27 ± 1,597.43 ml. The aspirated amount was 6.64% ± 2.20 of body weight. The mean Hgb value was 13.87 ± 1.99 before the third-generation internal UAL and 11.26 ± 2.16 (g/dL) after the third-generation internal UAL (z = 4.108, p < 0.001). The mean reduction in Hgb levels with the third-generation internal UAL was 2.61 ± 1.73 and 0.53 ± 0.36 per liter of aspirate taken. The mean Htc value after the third-generation internal UAL was 33.91 ± 6.03 and was significantly lower than the mean Htc value before the third-generation internal UAL, 41.39 ± 5.13 (z = −3.946, p < 0.001). The mean reduction in Htc with the third-generation internal UAL was 7.48 ± 5.42, and the Htc value decreased by 1.50 ± 1.13 per liter of aspirate ingested. The amount of aspirated supernatant was responsible for 44.4% of the change in Hgb and 30.9% of the change in Htc after the third-generation internal UAL.

Conclusion

Knowing the reduction rates in Hgb and Htc with the third-generation internal UAL is useful to plan the amount of aspirate to be taken, the amount of blood loss that may occur with the third-generation internal UAL, and the postoperative care of the patients.

Level of Evidence IV

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cosmetic Surgery National Data Bank (2012) statistics. Aesthet Surg J 33:1S-21S

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beidas OE, Gusenoff JA (2021) Update on liposuction: what all plastic surgeons should know. Plast Reconstr Surg 147:658e–668e

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kandulu H (2023) The short-term effect of vaser assisted liposuction on lipid profile. Aesthetic Plast Surg 47:685–689

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cansancao AL, Conde-Green A, David JA, Cansancao B, Vidigal RA (2018) Use of tranexamic acid to reduce blood loss in liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg 141:1132–1135

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cao H, Liu H (2022) Current status and prospects of clinical application of liposuction. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi 36:127–132

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pitman GH, Aker JS, Tripp ZD (1996) Tumescent liposuction a surgeon’s perspective. Clin Plast Surg 23:633–641

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nagy MW, Vanek PF Jr (2012) A multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, controlled clinical trial comparing VASER-assisted Lipoplasty and suction-assisted Lipoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 129:681e–689e

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Duscher D, Atashroo D, Maan ZN, Luan A, Brett EA, Barrera J, Khong SM, Zielins ER, Whittam AJ, Hu MS, Walmsley GG, Pollhammer MS, Schmidt M, Schilling AF, Machens HG, Huemer GM, Wan DC, Longaker MT, Gurtner GC (2016) Ultrasound-assisted liposuction does not compromise the regenerative potential of adipose-derived stem cells. Stem Cells Transl Med 5:248–257

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen L, Chang K, Chen Y, Xu Z, Shen W (2022) Does autologous transfusion decrease allogeneic transfusion in liposuction surgery of lymphedema patients? Front Med (Lausanne) 9:778230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. El Minawi HM, Kadry HM, El-Essawy NM, El Saadany ZA, Nouh OM (2023) The effect of tranexamic acid on blood loss in liposuction: a randomized controlled study. Eur J Plast Surg 46:227–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Abdelaal MM, Aboelatta YA (2014) Comparison of blood loss in laser lipolysis vs traditional liposuction. Aesthet Surg J 34:907–912

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Illouz YG (1983) Body contouring by lipolysis: a 5-year experience with over 3000 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 72:591–597

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fodor PB, Watson JP (1999) Wetting solutions in ultrasound-assisted lipoplasty. Clin Plast Surg 26(289–93):ix

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rohrich RJ, Beran SJ, Fodor PB (1997) The role of subcutaneous infiltration in suction-assisted lipoplasty: a review. Plast Reconstr Surg 99:514–519

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Massoud K, Hussein H, Aboulfotouh S, El Sherbiny K (2008) Evaluation of blood-loss in laser-assisted liposuction. Egy J Plast Recons Surg. 32:237–241

    Google Scholar 

  16. Garcia O Jr, Nathan N (2008) Comparative analysis of blood loss in suction-assisted lipoplasty and third-generation internal ultrasound-assisted lipoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 28:430–435

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Huseyin Kandulu Clinic for Plastic Surgery, Terrace Fulya Teşvikiye Mah. Hakkı Yeten Cad.No.13 Center 1 Kat 11 D.59, Teşvikiye, Istanbul, Turkey

    Hüseyin Kandulu

Authors
  1. Hüseyin Kandulu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hüseyin Kandulu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest to disclose.

Ethıcal Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from the study participants.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kandulu, H. Evaluation of Blood Loss in Third-Generation Internal Ultrasound-Assisted Liposuction. Aesth Plast Surg 48, 152–156 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03633-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03633-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation