Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quantifying Augmentation Gluteoplasty Outcomes: A Comparison of Three Instruments Used to Measure Gluteal Projection

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Gluteal augmentation is increasingly common. However, few studies have quantitatively reported postoperative gluteal projection. This study compared three different standardized instruments (i.e., radiographic, sonographic, and anthropometric) for quantifying gluteal projection after lumbar-hip dermal fat rotational flap to identify a simple, cost-efficient valid instrument.

Methods

A total of 10 women ages 35 to 68 years (mean, 47.3 years) with skin flaccidity and gluteal ptosis underwent bilateral lumbar-hip dermal fat rotation flap gluteal augmentation (20 procedures). Gluteal projection was measured 1 week preoperatively and 8 months postoperatively using computerized axial tomography (CAT) scan, ultrasound, and anthropometry.

Results

The CAT scan measured 1.40 cm of projection on the left (p < 0.001) and 1.43 cm on the right (p = 0.001). Ultrasound measured 2.16 cm of projection on the left (p < 0.001) and 1.88 cm on the right (p = 0.001). Anthropometry measured 1.75 cm of projection on the left (p < 0.01) and 1.35 cm on the right (p < 0.05). Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing the CAT scan, ultrasound, and anthropometry demonstrated statistically similar results on the left (p = 0.43) and right (p = 0.62).

Conclusions

All three instruments were sufficiently sensitive to measure a statistically significant increase in postoperative gluteal projection. Moreover, all three instruments were statistically similar in accuracy of measurement. Therefore, the authors conclude that ultrasound or anthropometry are satisfactory, inexpensive instruments for accurately quantifying postoperative gluteal projection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bartels RJ, O’Malley JE, Douglas WM, et al. (1969) An unusual use of the Cronin breast prosthesis: Case report. Plast Reconstr Surg 44:500–509

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Buchuk L (1986) Complication with gluteal prosthesis. Plast Reconstr Surg 77:1012–1019

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Cardenas-Camarena L, Lacouture AM, Tobar-Losada A (1999) Combined gluteoplasty: Liposuction and lipoinjection. Plast Reconstr Surg 104:1524–1523

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Centeno RF (2006) Autologous gluteal augmentation with circumferential body lift in the massive weight loss and aesthetic patient. Clin Plast Surg 33:479–496

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chajchir A (1996) Fat injection: Long-term follow-up. Aesthetic Plast Surg 20:291–296

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Chajchir A, Benzaquen I (1989) Fat grafting injection for soft tissue augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 84:921–934

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Colwell AS, Borud LJ (2007) Autologous gluteal augmentation after massive weight loss: Aesthetic analysis and role of the superior gluteal artery perforator flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 119:345–356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ford RD, Simpson WD (1992) Massive extravasation of traumatically ruptured buttock silicone prosthesis. Ann Plast Surg 29:86–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Illouz YG (1980) Une nouvelle technique pour les lipodystrophies localisees. Rev Chir Esthet 4:19–25

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lewis CM (1992) Correction of deep gluteal depression by autologous fat grafting. Aesthetic Plast Surg 16:247–250

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Matsudo PK, Toledo LS (1988) Experience of injected fat grafting. Aesth Plast Surg 12:35–38

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Pereira LH, Radwanski HN (1996) Fat grafting of the buttocks and lower limbs. Aesth Plast Surg 20:409–416

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Peren PA, Gomez JB, Guerrerosantos J, et al. (2000) Gluteus augmentation with fat grafting. Aesth Plast Surg 24:412–417

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Raposo-Amaral CE, Cetrulo CL Jr, Guidi Mde C, et al. (2006) Augmentation gluteoplasty using dermal fat autografting from the lower abdomen. Aesth Surg J 26:290–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Toledo LS (1991) Syringe liposculpture: A two-year experience. Aesth Plast Surg 15:321–326

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Coban YK, Uzel M, Celik M (2004) Correction of buttock ptosis with anchoring deepithelialized skin flaps. Aesth Plast Surg 28:116–119

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hurwitz DJ (2005) Medial thighplasty. Aesth Surg J 25:180–188

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Pascal JF, Le Louarn C (2002) Remodeling body lift with high lateral tension. Aesth Plast Surg 26:223–230

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Raposo-Amaral CE, Cetrulo CL Jr, Guidi Mde C, et al. (2006) Bilateral lumbar hip dermal fat rotation flaps: A novel technique for autologous augmentation gluteoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:1781–1788

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rhode CE, Gerut ZE (2005) Remodeling body lift with high lateral tension. Aesth Surg J 25:576–682

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Sozer SO, Agullo FJ, Wolf C (2005) Autoprosthesis buttock augmentation during lower body lift. Aesth Plast Surg 29:133–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Babuccu O, Gozil R, Ozmen S, et al. (2002) Gluteal region morphology: The effect of the weight gain and aging. Aesth Plast Surg 26:130–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Babuccu O, Kargi E, Hosnuter M, et al. (2004) Morphology of the gluteal region in the female population 5 to 83 years of age. Aesth Plast Surg 28:405–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors express their gratitude to Joseph G. McCarthy, M.D., for his helpful critical analysis and editorial suggestions. We hereby certify, that to the best of our knowledge, no financial support or benefits have been received by any coauthor, by any member of our immediate family, or by any individual or entity with which we have a significant relationship from any commercial source related directly or indirectly to the scientific work reported on in the article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Craniofacial Plastic Surgery-SOBRAPAR, Sobrapar, Campinas, Brazil

    Cassio Eduardo Raposo-Amaral

  2. Department of Radiology, Medical Sciences School–Universidade Estadual de Campinas, UNICAMP, Campinas, Brazil

    Daniel Miranda Ferreira

  3. The Institute of Reconstructive Plastic Surgery, New York University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA

    Stephen M. Warren

  4. Department of Genetic and Statistics, Medical Sciences School–Universidade Estadual de Campinas, UNICAMP, Campinas, Brazil

    Luis Alberto Magna

  5. Department of Plastic Surgery, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

    Lydia Massako Ferreira

Authors
  1. Cassio Eduardo Raposo-Amaral
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Miranda Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephen M. Warren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luis Alberto Magna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lydia Massako Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cassio Eduardo Raposo-Amaral.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Raposo-Amaral, C.E., Ferreira, D.M., Warren, S.M. et al. Quantifying Augmentation Gluteoplasty Outcomes: A Comparison of Three Instruments Used to Measure Gluteal Projection. Aesth Plast Surg 32, 333–338 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-007-9058-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-007-9058-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation