Advertisement

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 213–218 | Cite as

Safety of Ultrasound-Assisted Liposuction: A Survey of 660 Operations

  • Niloufar RoustaeiEmail author
  • Seyed Jafar Masoumi Lari
  • Majid Chalian
  • Hamid Chalian
  • Hooman Bakhshandeh
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Ultrasound-assisted liposuction (UAL), although providing some advantages over tumescent liposuction (TL) and traditional or suction-assisted liposuction (SAL), has been found to have some controversial complications. We performed this study to evaluate UAL’s complications and to compare UAL with the previous routine techniques for liposuction.

Methods

Six hundred sixty UALs were performed on 609 consecutive volunteers by one cosmetic surgeon. Demographic characteristics, local and systemic complications, and also severe adverse events (SAE) were registered intraoperatively and at 1, 4, and 12 weeks postoperatively.

Results

No SAEs were identified and only nine complications, consisting of two systemic complications (two cases of hypotension) and seven local complications (3 seromas, 3 cases of contact dermatitis, and 1 case of hemorrhage), were registered. This yields a complication incidence of 1.36%. There was no association between the number of complications and the body region, age, gender, or body mass index (BMI).

Conclusion

Our findings are in line with others in that performing UAL using local tumescent anesthesia is a safe procedure with a very low complication rate and has remarkable advantages over other liposuction techniques (TL and SAL). In addition, there was no correlation between the incidence of complications and body region, age, gender, or BMI.

Keywords

Ultrasound-assisted liposuction Complication Safety 

References

  1. 1.
    Housman TS, Lawrence N, Mellen BG, George MN, Filippo JS, Cerveny KA, DeMarco M, Feldman SR, Fleischer AB (2002) The safety of liposuction: results of a national survey. Dermatol Surg 28:971–978PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coleman WP, Hanke CW, Glogau RG (2000) Does the specialty of the physician affect fatality rates in liposuction? A comparison of specialty specific data. Dermatol Surg 26:611–615PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bowser A (2001) Near perfect safety rate may force liposuction name change. Dermatol Times 43Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bernstein G, Hanke CW (1988) Safety of liposuction: a review of 9478 cases performed by dermatologists. Dermatol Surg Oncol 14:1112–1114Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hanke CW, Bernstein G, Bullock S (1995) Safety of tumescent liposuction in 15, 336 patients. National survey results. Dermatol Surg 21:459–462Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Katz BE, Bruck MC, Felsenfeld L, Frew KE (2003) Power liposuction: a report on complications. Dermatol Surg 29:925–927PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cooter R, Babidge W, Mutimer K, Wickham P, Robinson D, Kiroff G, Chapman A, Maddern G (2001) Ultrasound-assisted lipoplasty. ANZ J Surg 71:309–317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Environ Corporation (1996) Literature-based review of ultrasound-assisted soft tissue aspiration. Environ Corp., Arlington, VAGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blondeel PN, Derks D, Roche N, Van Landuyt KH, Monstrey SJ (2003) The effect of ultrasound-assisted liposuction and conventional liposuction on the perforator vessels in the lower abdominal wall. Br J Plast Surg 56:266–271PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cárdenas-Camarena L, Andino-Ulloa R, Mora RC, Fajardo-Barajas D (2002) Laboratory and histopathologic comparative study of internal ultrasound-assisted lipoplasty and tumescent lipoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 110:1158–1164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cook WR Jr (1997) Utilizing external ultrasonic energy to improve the results of tumescent liposculpture. Dermatol Surg 23:1207–1211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Havoonjian HH, Luftman DB, Menaker GM, Moy RL (1997) External ultrasonic tumescent liposuction. A preliminary study. Dermatol Surg 23:1201–1206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fodor PB, Watson J (1998) Personal experience with ultrasound-assisted lipoplasty: a pilot study comparing ultrasound-assisted lipoplasty with traditional lipoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 101:1103–1116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Can Cedidi C, Berger A (2002) Severe abdominal wall necrosis after ultrasound-assisted liposuction. Aesthetic Plast Surg 26:20–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rao RB, Ely SF, Hoffman RS (1999) Death related to liposuction. N Engl J Med 340:1471–1475PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Teimourian B, Rogers WB III (1989) A national survey of complications associated with suction lipectomy: a comparative study. Plast Reconstr Surg 84:628–631PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Klein JA (1993) Tumescent technique for local anesthesia improves safety in large-volume liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg 92:1085–1098PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rohrich RJ, Beran SJ, Fodor PB (1997) The role of subcutaneous infiltration in suction-assisted lipoplasty: A review. Plast Reconstr Surg 99:514–519PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barillo DJ, Cancio LC, Kim SH (1998) Fatal and near-fatal complications of liposuction. South Med J 91:487–492PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grazer FM, de Jong RH (2000) Fatal outcomes from liposuction: census survey of cosmetic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:436–446PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Böni R (2007) Safety of tumescent liposuction. Praxis (Bern 1994) 96:1079–1082Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Doida Y, Brayman AA, Miller MW (1992) Modest enhancement of ultrasound-induced mutations in V79 cells in vitro. Ultrasound Med Biol 18:465–469PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fuciarelli AF, Sisk EC, Thomas RM, Miller DL (1995) Induction of base damage in DNA solutions by ultrasonic cavitation. Free Radic Biol Med 18:231–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kondo T, Yoshii G (1985) Effect of intensity of 1.2 MHz ultrasound on change in DNA synthesis of irradiated mouse L cells. Ultrasound Med Biol 11:113–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kondo T, Arai S, Kuwabara M, Yoshii G, Kano E (1985) Damage in DNA irradiated with 1.2 MHz ultrasound and its effect on template activity of DNA for RNA synthesis. Radiat Res 104:284–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lawrence N, Coleman WP (1997) The biologic basis of ultrasonic liposuction. Dermatol Surg 23:1197–1200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Maillard GF, Scheflan M, Bussien R (1997) Ultrasonically assisted lipectomy in aesthetic breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 100:238–241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Miller DL, Thomas RM (1996) The role of cavitation in the induction of cellular DNA damage by ultrasound and lithotripter shock waves in vitro. Ultrasound Med Biol 22:681–687PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Edwards R (1999) Shadow of a doubt. New Scientist 162:23Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Topaz M (1998) Long-term possible hazardous effects of ultrasonically assisted lipoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 102:280–283PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Baxter RA (1999) Histologic effects of ultrasound-assisted lipoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 19:109–115Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lack EB (1998) Safety of ultrasonic-assisted liposuction (UAL) using a non-water-cooled ultrasonic cannula A report of six cases of disproportionate fat deposits treated with UAL. Dermatol Surg 24:871–874PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Teimourian B (1997) Ultrasound-assisted liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg 100:1623–1625PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tebbetts JB (1998) Minimizing complications of ultrasound-assisted lipoplasty: an initial experience with no related complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 102:1690–1697PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Del Campo AF, Allegretti ER, Filho JA, Gordon CBM (1998) Liposuction: procedure for focal volume reduction and body contour remodeling. World J Surg 22:981–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hanke W, Cox SE, Kuznets N, Coleman WP (2004) Tumescent liposuction report performance measurement initiative: national survey results. Dermatol Surg 30:967–977PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Courtiss EH, Choucair RJ, Donelan MB (1992) Large-volume suction lipectomy: an analysis of 108 patients. Plastic Reconstr Surg 89:1068–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dillerud E (1991) Suction lipoplasty: a report on complications, undesired results, and patient satisfaction based on 3511 procedures. Plast Reconstr Surg 88:239–246PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Niloufar Roustaei
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Seyed Jafar Masoumi Lari
    • 1
  • Majid Chalian
    • 1
  • Hamid Chalian
    • 3
  • Hooman Bakhshandeh
    • 4
  1. 1.Iran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  2. 2.TehranIran
  3. 3.Tehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  4. 4.Department of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsSchool of Public Health, Medical Sciences/University of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations