ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2016
Prospective Controlled Study of Buttock Fat Transfer Using Ultrasound and Photographic Measurements.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Danger Zones of the Gluteal Anatomy: Improving the Safety Profile of the Gluteal Fat Grafting.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Papers on Gluteal Augmentation.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2024Review
- Study on promoting the regeneration of grafted fat by cell-assisted lipotransfer.Regenerative therapy · 2023Article
- Photographic Comparison of Malar Projection in 100 Facelift Patients Treated with and without Fat Injection.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2020Article
- Near-circumferential Lower Body Lift: A Review of 40 Outpatient Procedures.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2019Article
- The Expanding Role of Diagnostic Ultrasound in Plastic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundButtock fat transfer is now the preferred method for gluteal augmentation. However, its efficacy has not been well-documented using measurements.
methodsTwenty-five consecutive patients underwent buttock fat transfer performed by the author. Twenty-one patients returned for measurements ≥3 months after surgery (inclusion rate, 84%). A separate group of 25 patients undergoing cosmetic surgery without buttock fat transfer served as controls. All patients underwent superwet liposuction using total intravenous anesthesia and no prone positioning. A closed filtration system was used to collect the fat. Subcutaneous fat thickness was assessed using ultrasound imaging. Measurements were made on standardized photographs. The data were controlled for change in body mass index. Clinical data were also evaluated.
resultsThe mean fat volume injected per buttock was 287 mL (range, 70-550 mL). Ultrasound measurements detected a significant increase in the subcutaneous fat thickness (P ≤ 0.001), with mean increments of 0.66 cm for the right buttock and 0.86 cm for the left buttock and no significant change for control patients. The mean calculated fat retention, based on the measured surface area injected, was 66%. Photographic measurements of buttock projection revealed a significant increase in treated patients (P < 0.01) and no significant change in control patients. There were no clinical complications at either recipient or donor sites and no evidence of oily cysts on ultrasound examinations.
conclusionsPhotographic and ultrasound measurements, and clinical findings, confirm that buttock fat transfer effectively and safely increases buttock projection.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.