Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 80–86 | Cite as

Abdominoplasty Combined with Cesarean Delivery: Evaluation of the Practice

Original Article


Abdominoplasty is an aesthetic surgical procedure that restores abdominal contouring. Repeated pregnancy usually leads to lower abdominal skin redundancy and excess fat accumulation. Delivery via Cesarean section adds weakness to the lower abdominal wall muscles and yields a lower transverse Cesarean scar. Recently and in some cultures, abdominoplasty is requested at the same time of Cesarean delivery. Those women usually want to get the benefit of undergoing the abdominoplasty combined with Cesarean delivery in the same setting, thus avoiding a future surgery. This study was designed to evaluate the aesthetic outcome of combined abdominoplasty with Cesarean delivery. The study included 50 pregnant women from February 2008 to December 2009 with an average follow up period of 6 months. Nine patients (18%) developed wound infection; three of them (9%) developed wound dehiscence. Six patients (12%) developed lower abdominal skin necrosis; three of them (6%) were treated conservatively and healed by secondary intention, while surgical debridement and secondary sutures were needed in the other three patients (6%). Residual abdominal skin redundancy in 9 patients (18%), outward bulging of the abdomen and lack of waist definition in 16 patients (32%), and outward bulging of the umbilicus in 12 patients (24%) were the reported unaesthetic results. The results were compared with results of 80 abdominoplasties in nonpregnant women. The study concluded that abdominoplasty combined with Cesarean delivery carries a higher incidence of complications and does not give the desired aesthetic outcome. The authors do not recommend this practice.


Abdominoplasty Cesarean delivery Unaesthetic results 


  1. 1.
    Jóźwik M, Lotocki W, Jóźwik M (1995) Vascular anatomy of the anterior abdominal wall in gynecology and obstetrics. Am J Obstet Gynecol 172(6):1944–1945CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coldron Y, Stokes MJ, Newham DJ, Cook K (2008) Postpartum characteristics of rectus abdominis on ultrasound imaging. Man Therapy 13(2):112–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Muallem MM, Rubeiz NG (2006) Physiological and biological skin changes in pregnancy. Clin Dermatol 24(2):80–88CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Elling SV, Powell FC (1997) Physiological changes in the skin during pregnancy. Clin Dermatol 15(1):35–44CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Placek PJ, Taffel SM (1988) Recent patterns in Cesarean delivery in the United States. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 15(4):607–627PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Al-Qattan MM (1997) Abdominoplasty in multiparous women with severe musculoaponeurotic laxity. Br J Plast Surg 50(6):450–455CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Borg-Stein J, Dugan SA (2007) Musculoskeletal disorders of pregnancy, delivery and postpartum. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 18(3):459–476PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oppenheimer LW, Sherriff EA, Goodman JD (1986) The duration of lochia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 93(7):754–757CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sherman D, Lurie S, Frenkel E (1999) Characteristics of normal lochia. Am J Perinatol 16(8):399–402CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Paramore RH (1913) The intra-abdominal pressure in pregnancy. Lancet 181(4686):1725–1727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kryger ZB, Dumanian GA, Howard MA (2007) Safety issues in combined gynecologic and plastic surgical procedures. Int J Gynecol Obstet 99(3):257–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harris NR, Rumbaut RE (2001) Age-related responses of the microcirculation to ischemia-reperfusion and inflammation. Pathophysiology 8(1):1–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van den Heuvel MG, Buurman WA, Bast A, van der Hulst RR (2009) Review: ischaemia–reperfusion injury in flap surgery. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 62(6):721–726CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matarasso A (1991) Abdominolipoplasty: a system of classification and treatment for combined abdominoplasty and suction-assisted lipectomy. Aesthet Plast Surg 15(2):111–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stewart KJ, Stewart DA, Coghlan B, Harrison DH, Jones BM, Waterhouse N (2006) Complications of 278 consecutive abdominoplasties. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 59(11):1152–1155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heller JB, Teng E, Knoll BI, Persing J (2008) Outcome analysis of combined lipoabdominoplasty versus conventional abdominoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 121(5):1821–1829CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hamel KJ (2007) Incidence of adhesions at repeat Cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 196(5):31–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plastic SurgeryAin Shams UniversityCairoEgypt
  2. 2.Department of Gynecology and ObstetricsAin Shams UniversityCairoEgypt

Personalised recommendations