ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
The Impact of Chemoprophylaxis and Patients' Demographics on Bleeding After Abdominal Body Contouring Procedures.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the current increase in body contouring surgery (BCS), the impact of preoperative chemoprophylaxis on bleeding after BCS remains undetermined.
methodsA single institution retrospective cohort study examined patients undergoing abdominal BCS (abdominoplasty, lower body lift, and/or liposuction). Outcomes included estimated blood loss (EBL), hemoglobin drop on the first post-operative day, drain output, length of hospital stay, and the need for surgical evacuation of hematoma or transfusion. Statistical tests performed included chi-square, Wilcoxon signed-rank, and linear regressions using R.
resultsOf the 697 patients, 136 (19.5%) received no anticoagulation, 324 (46.5%) had preoperative anticoagulation, 209 (29.9%) received both preoperative and postoperative anticoagulation, and 28 (4%) had missing data. Preoperative LMWH was linked to a 45% increase in serosanguinous drain output on day one (145 ml vs. 100 ml; p < 0.001) but did not increase bleeding risk. Male patients had higher odds of hematoma (OR 14.8, p < 0.001), greater need for blood (OR 5.13, p < 0.001) or plasma (OR 6.15, p < 0.001) transfusion, more significant hemoglobin drop (- 2.23 +/- 1.06 g/dL vs. - 1.43 +/- 1.01 g/dL, p < 0.001), and higher drain output on day one (180 mL vs. 130 mL, p < 0.001) and overall (655 mL vs. 380 mL, p < 0.001). Previous obesity surgery patients also had higher odds for hematoma (OR 3.24, p = 0.011), blood transfusion (OR 3.26, p = 0.002), and increased drain output.
conclusionsPreoperative chemoprophylaxis in BCS is associated with increased serosanguinous drain output without additional bleeding risk. Male gender and a history of obesity surgery increase the risk of hematoma, hemoglobin drop, and transfusion needs. 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 Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40456988What 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.