Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37069350›Full record

ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2023

Outcomes of Intramuscular Gluteal Augmentation With Implants Using Tumescent Local Anesthesia.

Emilio Trignano, Matilde Tettamanzi, Corrado Liperi, Edoardo Beatrici, Pietro Luciano Serra, Claudia Trignano, Corrado Rubino

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Pilot Study: Hourglass Technique for Male Gluteal Enhancement.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emilio TrignanoDepartment of Surgical, Microsurgical and Medical Sciences, Plastic Surgery Unit, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.
Matilde TettamanziDepartment of Surgical, Microsurgical and Medical Sciences, Plastic Surgery Unit, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy. tettamanzimatilde@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2985-5902
Corrado LiperiIntensive Care Unit, Emergency Department, AOU Sassari, Sassari, Italy.
Edoardo BeatriciDepartment of Urology, Humanitas Research Hospital - IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Pietro Luciano SerraDepartment of Surgical, Microsurgical and Medical Sciences, Plastic Surgery Unit, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.
Claudia TrignanoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.
Corrado RubinoDepartment of Surgical, Microsurgical and Medical Sciences, Plastic Surgery Unit, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.
University of Sassari · ITAzienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Sassari · ITIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTumescent local anesthesia (TLA) describes the practice of injecting a very dilute solution of local anesthetic combined with epinephrine and sodium bicarbonate into the tissue until it becomes firm and tense to obtain local anesthesia and vasoconstriction. The use of TLA in augmentation intramuscular gluteoplasty has never been described for implants positioning. Advantages of the TLA technique include a reduction in blood loss through epinephrine-induced vasoconstriction and hydrostatic compression from the tumescent effect. We describe TLA technique for primary intramuscular gluteal augmentation, reporting our experience during the last 5 years.

methodsFrom 2017 to 2021, 20 patients underwent bilateral primary gluteal augmentation under TLA and conscious sedation. The tumescent solution was prepared with 25 mL of 2% lidocaine, 8 mEq of sodium bicarbonate, and 1 mL of epinephrine (1 mg/1 mL) in 1000 mL of 0.9% saline solution. The solution was infiltrated with a cannula inside the gluteus maximus muscle intra-operatively.

resultsThe mean age of the patients was 39, 15 years. The average amount of tumescent solution infiltrated was 240 mL per gluteus. Operating time was 1 h and 40 min, and recovery room time averaged 240 min. Major surgery-related complications were found in 15% of patients (2 hematomas and 1 seroma) and minor complications were described in a total of 8 patients (4 wound dehiscence and 1 dystrophic scar formation). No signs of adrenaline nor lidocaine toxicity were reported and conversion to general anesthesia was never required.

conclusionsThe tumescent local anesthesia technique represents a safe and efficacious technique for performing gluteal augmentation surgery with an intramuscular implant positioning. The advantages of this technique are safety, reasonable pain control during and after surgery and a low incidence of postoperative side effects due to general anesthesia avoidance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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 .

Indexed as

Anesthesia, LocalSodium BicarbonateEpinephrineHumansLidocaineTreatment OutcomeEpinephrineLidocaineSodium Bicarbonate

Identifiers

PMID37069350
PMCPMC10582138
OpenAlexW4366204986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.