Outcomes of Abdominoplasty in Tumescent Local Anesthesia Combined with Subdural Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Abdominoplasty is a common surgical procedure performed under general anesthesia, and although the use of TLA combined with subdural anesthesia has never been reported in abdominoplasty, it offers several benefits such as safe and effective local anesthesia and vasoconstriction. We outline our experience with the TLA technique for primary abdominoplasty over the last 7 years. METHODS: From 2014 to 2021, TLA and subdural anesthesia have been used in primary abdominoplasty surgeries for 106 patients. The TLA solution consisted of 25 mL of 2% lidocaine, 8 mEq of sodium bicarbonate, and 1 mL of epinephrine (1 mg/1 mL) diluted in 1000 mL of 0.9% saline solution. The solution was then injected with a 2-mm cannula into the subcutaneous adipose tissue in the suprafascial plane. The subdural anesthesia was performed at intervertebral level L1-L2 using Ropivacaine 15/18 mg in 4 ml. RESULTS: Patients aged from 32 to 75 years. The amount of tumescent solution infiltrated ranged between 500 and 1000 mL. Mean surgery time was 70 minutes, and recovery room time averaged at 240 minutes. Major complications related to the surgery were observed in 12.26% of patients, including eight hematomas and five seromas. Two patients experienced wound dehiscence, and no dystrophic scar formation was observed. Eventually, there was no need for a conversion to general anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Tumescent local anesthesia combined with subdural anesthesia is a highly effective and safe method for performing abdominoplasty. This technique has proven to be an excellent choice for primary abdominoplasty, providing significant benefits to patients and surgeons alike due to its safe administration, precise pain management during and after surgery, and minimal postoperative side effects. 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 .

Outcomes of Intramuscular Gluteal Augmentation With Implants Using Tumescent Local Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Tumescent local anesthesia (TLA) describes the practice of injecting a very dilute solution of local anesthetic combined with epinephrine and sodium bicarbonate into the tissue until it becomes firm and tense to obtain local anesthesia and vasoconstriction. The use of TLA in augmentation intramuscular gluteoplasty has never been described for implants positioning. Advantages of the TLA technique include a reduction in blood loss through epinephrine-induced vasoconstriction and hydrostatic compression from the tumescent effect. We describe TLA technique for primary intramuscular gluteal augmentation, reporting our experience during the last 5 years. METHODS: From 2017 to 2021, 20 patients underwent bilateral primary gluteal augmentation under TLA and conscious sedation. The tumescent solution was prepared with 25 mL of 2% lidocaine, 8 mEq of sodium bicarbonate, and 1 mL of epinephrine (1 mg/1 mL) in 1000 mL of 0.9% saline solution. The solution was infiltrated with a cannula inside the gluteus maximus muscle intra-operatively. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 39, 15 years. The average amount of tumescent solution infiltrated was 240 mL per gluteus. Operating time was 1 h and 40 min, and recovery room time averaged 240 min. Major surgery-related complications were found in 15% of patients (2 hematomas and 1 seroma) and minor complications were described in a total of 8 patients (4 wound dehiscence and 1 dystrophic scar formation). No signs of adrenaline nor lidocaine toxicity were reported and conversion to general anesthesia was never required. CONCLUSIONS: The tumescent local anesthesia technique represents a safe and efficacious technique for performing gluteal augmentation surgery with an intramuscular implant positioning. The advantages of this technique are safety, reasonable pain control during and after surgery and a low incidence of postoperative side effects due to general anesthesia avoidance. 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 .