Urbonas, Tautvydas

Introduction Aesthetic surgery, including abdominoplasty(AP), is increasingly sought after for enhancing physical appearance and restoring body confidence post-pregnancy or significant weight loss. AP focuses on improving the abdominal area by removing excess skin and fat and tightening the abdominal muscles. The Mommy Makeover(MM), combining AP with breast reshaping and liposuction, addresses broader body reshaping needs. Given the popularity of both procedures,this study explores the efficacy and safety of AP both as a standalone procedure and as part of the MM. Aim of the study To evaluate and compare the aesthetic outcomes, patient satisfaction, and safety of AP as an individual procedure versus as a component of the MM. Materials and methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of 92 female patients who underwent AP alone or as part of MM in 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: Group A (GA) (n=39) received only AP, and Group B (GB) (n=53) underwent MM. Both groups had diastasis recti abdominis correction. Pre- and post-operative satisfaction was measured using the 'BODY-Q' questionnaire, which included “Satisfaction with Abdomen Surgery” before (SABS) and after (SAAS), and “Appraisal of Body Contouring Scars” for AP (AAP). Statistical analysis used Mann-Whitney U and unpaired t-tests with a significance level set at 0.05. Results No significant differences were observed between the groups for both age and BMI (p<0,05). When comparing SABS, there was no significant difference in both G1 (Mdn=0) and G2 (Mdn=0).Regarding SAAS, a statistically significant difference was observed, with more patients in G1 (Mdn=93) being satisfied with their abdomen than in G2 (Mdn=74)(U=736, p=0.0478). Appraisal AAP revealed significantly more visible scars in G2 (Mdn=59) compared to G1 (Mdn=100) (U=678.5, p<0.0001). Additionally, more patients experienced complications in G2 (55.56%) compared to G1 (33.33%) (χ²=4.499,p=0.0339). The duration required to return to maximum physical exertion did not differ significantly between groups, with the majority in G1 (47.37%) requiring 3-4 months and in G2 (41.38%) 4-6 months, showing no statistical difference between groups. Conclusions AP alone yielded higher patient satisfaction and lesser visible scarring compared to when performed as part of a MM. Despite similar recovery times, the MM procedure was associated with a higher rate of complications, suggesting that AP alone might be the safer and more aesthetically pleasing option for patients primarily concerned with abdominal aesthetics.

Introduction Aesthetic surgery, particularly abdominoplasty (AP), has gained considerable popularity in recent years as individuals seek to enhance their physical appearance and reclaim a sense of body confidence after pregnancy or weight loss (1). AP enhances the appearance of the abdomen by removing excess skin and fat while also tightening the muscles of the abdominal wall. The Mommy Makeover (MM), which usually combines AP with breast reshaping and liposuction, is becoming very popular among women to help reshape their bodies (2). Therefore, an occasional inquiry arises as to the viability of opting for a complex procedure when the predominant issue entails diastasis of the recti abdominis (DRA) and excess abdominal skin (3). Notably, a restricted number of studies have explored this issue; however, literature debates persist regarding the safety and aesthetic outcomes in patients undergoing combined procedures (4). [...].

Background: Autologous fat grafting is widely used in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Liposuction methods play a key role in surgeons' work efficiency, adipocyte viability, graft survival, and outcomes. We investigated the effect of four liposuction methods on adipocyte viability, debris, and surgeons' work efficiency by measuring the active energy expenditure and changes in heart rate. Methods: Human lipoaspirate was harvested from patients' removed abdominal flaps using four different liposuction methods, and we counted calories per aspirated volume and surgeons' heart rate. Adipocytes were separated from the lipoaspirate immediately by digestion with 0.1% type I collagenase. After digestion, parts of the cells and debris were measured. Adipocytes were plated in an adipocyte maintenance medium containing Alamar blue reagent. The adipocyte metabolic activity was measured using a spectrophotometer. Results: After evaluating the active energy expenditure and changes in surgeons' heart rate, the ultrasonic-assisted liposuction (UAL) method was determined to be the most ergonomic liposuction device for surgeons. In addition, adipocyte viability was higher in the UAL group than in the other groups, and debris was the lowest in the power-assisted liposuction 1 group (PAL1). Conclusions: Adipocyte viability is crucial for improving fat grafting outcomes. This study revealed that the viability of adipocytes is best preserved using the UAL and PAL1 liposuction methods. The UAL and PAL1 methods caused the least damage to the cells. The UAL method yielded the best results for surgeons' work efficiency.

Objectives (oral/poster only) Complications after fat grafting (FG) persist to this day. One of the most important factors for successful FG is to maximise adiposity mass (AM) obtained and to minimise oil mass (OM) during liposuction. In the last decade, only a few studies have examined the effect of age on AM and OM and found no association. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of age on fat parameters obtained during liposuction. Materials and methods (oral/poster only) The prospective study included 50 women who underwent abdominoplasty with abdominal skin flap removal and vibro-assisted liposuction in Kaunas private clinic in 2022. Inclusion criteria were age between 30 and 60, no co-morbidities or harmful habits. Parameters such as age and body mass index (BMI) were included. A total of 100 fat tubes were collected. Enzymatic isolation and centrifugation methods were used and samples were separated into the upper OM, the middle of AM and a lower fraction of water. After obtaining the weight of each fraction, the water was removed from the calculations. Using GraphPad Prism 9 software Spearman correlation coefficient was used and for descriptive statistics, median values (min-max) were calculated. Results (oral/poster only) The median age was 41.5 (31-60) years. The median AM was 81.08 (45.13%-97.5%) and the median of OM was 18.9% (2.5%-54.87%). Median BMI was 30.57 (23.4-33.6 ). There was a negative moderate statistically significant correlation between age and AM (-0.4132 p=0.0029). There was a passive moderate statistically significant correlation between age and OM (0.4132 p=0.0029). A positive very weak statistically not significant correlation was found between BMI and age (0.2401 p>0.05). Conclusions Younger age may be associated with higher AM. Older age may be related to higher OM. Higher AM and OM mass increase the likelihood of good FG, so we assume that FG is most effective at a younger age.