ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Technical Evolution with Intramuscular Gluteal Filling: A 15-year Cohort, 5.081 Procedures, and Creation of Advanced Gluteal Modeling (MAG).
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGluteal augmentation with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) has gained popularity due to its durability, biostimulatory effects, and minimally invasive nature. However, data on safety and complication rates across different application techniques remain limited.
objectiveTo evaluate complication rates in 5081 PMMA gluteal augmentation procedures performed in 3195 patients over 15 years, comparing three progressively refined techniques.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted at two clinical centers in Brazil between 2009 and 2024. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the technique used: Group 1: classic intramuscular injection under local anesthesia; Group 2: ultrasound-guided technique with gluteal mapping; and Group 3: Advanced Gluteal Modeling (MAG) technique with ultrasound guidance and sedation. Complications were assessed through medical record review and included nodules, granulomas, infection, hematoma, and neurological symptoms.
resultsAmong the 3195 patients (97% female), complication rates decreased across the groups: Group 1: 2.1%; Group 2: 1.7%; and Group 3: 1.4%. Nodules were the most common adverse event. No cases of necrosis or long-term neurological deficits were observed. The MAG technique demonstrated the lowest complication rate, attributed to improved precision from imaging and controlled settings.
conclusionsThe use of PMMA for gluteal augmentation is safe when performed by trained professionals. The MAG technique presented superior safety results, showing that advances in the technique, as well as performance in a controlled environment, can significantly reduce complications. 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
42432375What 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.