Impact of Lipo-Body Lift Compared to Classical Lower Body Lift on Postoperative Outcome and Patient's Satisfaction: A Retrospective Study.

Meal, Cécile; Mocquard, Camille; Bergeat, Damien; Chaput, Benoit; Aillet, Sylvie; Watier, Eric; Bertheuil, Nicolas

INTRODUCTION Lately, the growing number of bariatric procedures performed each year led to an increasing demand for lower trunk reconstruction. Our team previously described the lipo-body lift (LBL) technique into lower duration of drainage and therefore seromas and other complications. In this study, we compared the classical body lift (CBL) technique to the LBL procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS All patients who underwent a LBL or CBL after massive weight loss between November 2012 and October 2017 were included. Surgery outcome parameters were collected as well as patient satisfaction through a satisfaction score realized at least after 1 year postoperative. Comparisons between CBL and LBL were conducted to assess the surgery's safety and the patient's satisfaction. RESULTS A total of 130 patients were included, 61 patients who had a LBL were compared to 69 patients who had a CBL. The mean patient age was 39.64 ± 9.97 (21-66) years old, the mean body mass index before plastic surgery was 26.83 ± 3.08 kg/m2 (19.83-32.69), and the average weight loss was 53.40 ± 17.37 kg. The two groups had comparable preoperative data. Duration of drainage and hospital stay was significantly lower in the LBL group than in the CBL (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively). Surgical outcomes were comparable between groups as well as patient satisfaction scores. CONCLUSION Lipo-body lift allows early discharge of the patient by reducing the duration of drainage without increasing the risk for complications. In our opinion, this technique should be used for type 1 and 2 patients with no contraindication for abdominal liposuction. 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 .