Comparing the safety profiles of implants and autologous fat grafting in gluteal augmentation: A systematic review

Gluteal augmentation has become a popular esthetic procedure since its inception. The main methods are augmentation using implants or autologous fat grafting, which is the harvesting and grafting of patients' own fat tissue. The last review comparing the safety of these methods was written 7 years ago, which warrants the writing of a new one. PubMed, Cochrane, and Medline were searched for studies focusing on the methods of gluteal augmentation listed previously. Five search terms were used and 15 studies fulfilled the criteria. The data were cataloged according to the method described and outcomes compared. Seven articles focused on gluteal implants and another seven assessed autologous fat grafting, whereas one detailed both. The most common complications in 524 implant procedures were wound dehiscence (9.16%), excessive implant palpability (5.92%), and seroma (3.82%), with an overall complication rate of 25%. The most common complications in 1788 gluteal fat augmentation procedures were seroma (6.9%), infection (3.0%), and transient sciatic paresthesia (1.0%), with an overall complication rate of 13%. Several articles listed satisfaction figures, but these were not assessed because this article was not powered to assess this outcome. Overall, gluteal augmentation using autologous fat grafting leads to fewer postoperative complications than implants and allows greater contouring of the buttocks and the surrounding areas. However, it can also be a far more dangerous procedure if certain recommendations are not followed.