Treatment and Prevention of Umbilical Sagging with Laser-assisted Liposuction: The New Happy Protocol.

Sagging of the periumbilical skin, also known as the "sad umbilicus," is one of the most common postoperative complications in liposuction. It is characterized by an increase in the width and decrease in the height of the umbilicus. Technological advances in power-assisted liposuction resulting in skin tightening have been central to improvements in the treatment of sagging skin. Laser-assisted liposuction is a procedure in which a laser fiber induces lipolysis and skin tightening. Laser treatment delivered using a 980-nm diode laser may result in up to 30% skin surface area contraction. The aim of this study was to describe a new technique called the "happy protocol" for the treatment and prevention of the sad umbilicus. The periumbilical region is treated using a 980-nm diode laser set to an output power of 20 W, with a total delivered energy of 5000 J. The developed technique may be applied to correct shape distortions or to create a natural-looking and aesthetically pleasant umbilicus during liposuction. A decrease in the width of the umbilicus followed by an increase in height are observed in the first postoperative days. Patients who were followed up for 7 months postoperatively showed positive aesthetic results. The final outcome was an oval-shaped umbilicus, with increased height and reduced sagging in the periumbilical region.

Global Prevalence and Preferences of Progressive Tension Suture Usage in Abdominoplasties.

BACKGROUND: Abdominoplasty is one of the most popular esthetic procedures. Seroma is the most frequent postoperative complication. Two decades of literature have described benefits of quilting sutures/progressive tension sutures (PTS) in reducing seroma rates and other complications in abdominoplasties. Despite this, PTS have not been universally adopted by plastic surgeons (ISAPS international survey on aesthetic/cosmetic procedures performed in 2020, 2021) Furthermore, PTS techniques and preferences vary widely. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of PTS use, reasons for reluctance to utilize them, and variety of techniques utilized by plastic surgeons performing abdominoplasties internationally. METHODS: A 13-question survey was emailed via ISAPS to 3842 plastic surgeons internationally. Responses were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 272 respondents, the majority, 58%, currently use PTS. 46% were introduced to PTS during training. Only PTS training exposure was found to significantly correlate with current usage. Only 22% of North American trainees were exposed to PTS compared to 40-62% of trainees from other geographies. Of respondents who utilize PTS, most, 74%, combine them with drains. The majority use interrupted sutures, 65%, while 19% utilize a running suture, and the remaining 16% combine interrupted and running sutures. Of respondents who do not currently utilize PTS, the most common reason stated is that the surgeon's technique works well without them, 73%, which was significantly correlated with years in practice. CONCLUSION: Globally, most plastic surgeons currently utilize PTS (typically with drains) with training exposure being a significant predictor. There are still areas to address reluctance to implement them and use them without drains. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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 .

Development and Initial Validation of a Novel Professional Aesthetic Scale for the Female Abdomen.

BACKGROUND: A growing body of literature describes abdominal aesthetic goals to tailor surgical and nonsurgical treatment options to meet patient goals. The authors aimed to integrate layperson perceptions into the design of a novel professional aesthetic scale for the abdomen. METHODS: An iterative process of expert consensus was used to choose five domains: abdominal muscle lines, abdominal shape, scar, skin, and umbilicus. A survey was developed to measure global and domain-specific aesthetic preferences on five abdomens. This was distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk to 340 respondents. Principal component analysis was used to integrate survey data into weights for each of the scale's subquestions. Attending plastic surgeons then rated abdomens using the final scale, and reliability and validity were calculated. RESULTS: The final scale included 11 subquestions-hourglass shape, bulges, hernia, infraumbilical skin, supraumbilical skin, umbilicus shape, umbilicus medialization position, umbilicus height position, semilunar lines, central midline depression, and scar-within the five domains. Central midline depression held the highest weight (16.1 percent) when correlated with global aesthetic rating, followed by semilunar lines (15.8 percent) and infraumbilical skin (11.8 percent). The final scale demonstrated strong validity (Pearson r = 0.99) and was rated as easy to use by seven attending plastic surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: The final scale is the first published professional aesthetic scale for the abdomen that aims to integrate layperson opinion. This analysis and survey data provide insights into the importance of 11 components in overall aesthetic appeal of the abdomen.

Natural evolution of seroma in abdominoplasty.

BACKGROUND: Abdominoplasty is one of the most performed aesthetic surgical procedures, and seroma is a common local complication. The aim of this study was to investigate the beginning of seroma formation after abdominoplasty and its progression. METHODS: Twenty-one female patients underwent standard abdominoplasty. To investigate seroma formation, abdominal ultrasound was performed in five regions of the abdominal wall (i.e., epigastric, umbilical, hypogastric, right iliac fossa, and left iliac fossa regions) at five different time points: postoperative days 4, 11, 18, 25, and 32. RESULTS: The incidence of seroma was 4.8 percent on postoperative day 4, 38.1 percent on postoperative day 11, 33.3 percent on postoperative day 18, 23.8 percent on postoperative day 25, and 19 percent on postoperative day 32. The left iliac fossa region had the highest relative volume of fluid collection on postoperative day 4, as did both the right iliac fossa and left iliac fossa regions on postoperative day 11. At other time points, the relative volume of fluid collection was significantly higher in the right iliac fossa region. CONCLUSION: The highest incidence of seroma occurred on postoperative day 11, and the iliac fossae were the most common locations of seroma.

Journal impact factor versus the evidence level of articles published in plastic surgery journals.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between impact factor and the level of evidence of articles in plastic surgery journals. METHODS: The four plastic surgery journals with the top impact factors in 2011 were selected. Articles were selected using the PubMed database between January 1 and December 31, 2011. The journal evidence index was calculated by dividing the number of randomized clinical trials by the total number of articles published in the specific journal, multiplied by 100. This index was correlated to the impact factor of the journal and compared with the average of the other journals. Two investigators independently evaluated each journal, followed by a consensus and assessment of the interexaminer concordance. The kappa test was used to evaluate the concordance between the two investigators and Fisher's exact test was used to evaluate which journal presented the highest number of randomized clinical trials. RESULTS: The journal evidence index values were as follows: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 1.70; Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, 0.40; Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 0.56; and Annals of Plastic Surgery, 0.35. The impact factors of these journals in 2011 were as follows: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 3.382; Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, 1.494; Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 1.407; and Annals of Plastic Surgery, 1.318. After consensus, the quantity of adequate studies was low and similar between these journals; only the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery showed a higher journal evidence index. CONCLUSIONS: The journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery exhibited the highest journal evidence index and had the highest impact factor. The number of adequate articles was low in all of the assessed journals.