A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of Limited-Undermining Lipoabdominoplasty and Traditional Abdominoplasty Using Laser Fluorescence Imaging. | LitMetric

Comparison of Limited-Undermining Lipoabdominoplasty and Traditional Abdominoplasty Using Laser Fluorescence Imaging.

Aesthet Surg J

Mr Harris is a medical student, Dr Barton is a Clinical Professor, and Dr Kenkel is the Vice Chairman and Program Director of the Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas

Published: July 2014

Background: Body contouring that involves abdominoplasty and/or liposuction is a common cosmetic surgery procedure. Although single-staged lipoabdominoplasty has gained popularity, safety concerns remain.

Objectives: The authors compared abdominal flap perfusion and overall complication rates for traditional abdominoplasty and limited-undermining lipoabdominoplasty.

Methods: Eighteen abdominoplasty patients were evaluated in a prospective study. All patients were nonsmokers and lacked major comorbidities. The control group (n = 9) underwent traditional abdominoplasty with wide undermining. The study group (n = 9) underwent abdominoplasty with limited undermining as well as liposuction of the abdominal flap. The groups were similar with respect to age and body mass index. Patients received follow-up for an average of 97 days. Fluorescence imaging was utilized for perfusion studies. Results and complications were documented, and statistical significance was ascertained via the Student t test.

Results: Neither group had major complications or revisions. Minor complications included an exposed suture, resulting in delayed wound healing, in the control group. A patient in the study group had a small area of fat necrosis and a small seroma, neither of which required further treatment. No significant difference in abdominal flap perfusion was found between the control (57%) and study (50%) groups based on fluorescence levels relative to a designated baseline reference marker.

Conclusions: Results of the study indicate that no significant differences exist between the 2 operations with respect to the rates of abdominal flap perfusion or complications.

Level Of Evidence: 3.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1090820X14532286DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

abdominal flap
16
traditional abdominoplasty
12
flap perfusion
12
fluorescence imaging
8
control group
8
group underwent
8
study group
8
abdominoplasty
6
study
5
group
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!