ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Deep Sedation Versus General Anesthesia: What's Really Best for High-Definition Abdominal Liposuction?
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-definition abdominal liposuction is a complex procedure requiring optimal anesthetic management to ensure patient safety and favorable outcomes. This study evaluates and compares the safety and efficacy of general anesthesia and deep sedation in this context.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 681 patients who underwent high-definition abdominal liposuction between 2015 and 2023. Patients were divided into two groups: 187 received general anesthesia (Group I), while 484 underwent deep sedation (Group II). Perioperative management, including the use of compression garments, Caprini score-based thromboprophylaxis, and standardized follow-up protocols, was consistent across groups.
resultsNo statistically significant differences in major complications such as hematomas (p = 0.08), infections (p = 0.15), or VTEs (p = 1.00) were observed between the groups. Both techniques facilitated early mobilization and timely discharge. Tailored interventions, including preoperative risk assessments and perioperative warming, contributed to a low overall complication rate. Despite the absence of tranexamic acid, outcomes remained favorable, likely due to adequate tumescent infiltration times and other precautionary measures.
conclusionsBoth general anesthesia and deep sedation are effective and safe for high-definition abdominal liposuction. The findings underscore the importance of individualized risk management strategies and highlight the feasibility of deep sedation as a routine alternative. This study provides evidence-based guidance for selecting anesthetic techniques in cosmetic surgery. 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 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40775195What 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.