Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39444536›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024

Management of Plastic Surgery Complications at a Tertiary Medical Center after Aesthetic Procedures.

Caitlyn C Belza, Kelli Lopes, Paige Benyamein, Cyril Harfouche, Riley Dean, Santaria Geter, Clara J Lee, Dan Neubauer, Chris M Reid, Ahmed Suliman and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Who Owns the Complications? A Call for Accountability in Cosmetic Medical Tourism.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026
    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

11 authors.

Caitlyn C BelzaFrom the School of Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Kelli LopesFrom the School of Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Paige BenyameinDivision of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.
Cyril HarfoucheDivision of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.
Riley DeanDivision of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.
Santaria GeterDepartment of Medicine, Division of Medicine, Meharry Medical College School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn.
Clara J LeeDepartment of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, United States Navy, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Dan NeubauerDepartment of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, United States Navy, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Chris M ReidDivision of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.
Ahmed SulimanDivision of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.
Amanda A GosmanDivision of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The aesthetic plastic surgery industry has seen tremendous growth, with Americans spending an estimated 20 billion dollars on procedures in 2020. However, the effect of complications from these procedures on the healthcare system is poorly understood. This study aims to create awareness regarding aesthetic procedure complications through the scope of plastic surgeons at a tertiary medical facility. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who received care at a single academic tertiary referral center over 5 years for complications from a cash-paid aesthetic procedure at an outside facility. Physician and hospital billing data were analyzed for relevant encounters. Results: Patients in this study (n = 40) presented to the emergency department most frequently with complications secondary to abdominoplasty (35%), breast augmentation (27.5%), and injectable fillers (17.5%). The most common complications were infection (32.5%) and wound dehiscence (22.5%). Of those evaluated, 50% required inpatient admission. Additionally, 42.5% required surgical intervention. The distribution of payors included Medicaid (55%), commercial insurance (30%), and Medicare (7.5%), and 7.5% were uninsured. For physician billing, the total gross collection ratio was 21.3%, whereas the hospital billing total gross collection ratio was 25.16%. Conclusions: Larger referral hospitals are well-suited to support the aesthetic community with complication management; however, the care required to serve this population is resource-intensive. These data advocate for thorough closed-loop patient-surgeon communication regarding risk-benefit analysis and detailed courses of action should complications arise. Likewise, stronger communication between ambulatory surgical centers and tertiary referral centers may also help minimize complications and subsequent healthcare needs.

Identifiers

PMID39444536
PMCPMC11498925

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.