Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Minimal-access variations in abdominoplasty

A Matarasso1

  • 1Department of Plastic Surgery, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital, New York, USA.

Annals of Plastic Surgery
|March 1, 1995
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Where have all the heroes gone?

Aesthetic surgery journal·2009
Same author

Effective use of botox for lateral canthal rhytids.

Aesthetic surgery journal·2009
Same author

Abdominal contour surgery: treating all aesthetic units, including the mons pubis.

Aesthetic surgery journal·2009
Same author

Remembering september 11.

Aesthetic surgery journal·2009
Same author

Awareness and avoidance of abdominoplasty complications.

Aesthetic surgery journal·2009
Same author

Superwet anesthesia redefines large-volume liposuction.

Aesthetic surgery journal·2009

Less invasive abdominal contouring surgery, including abdominoplasty, now offers more options. Patient selection based on skin, fat, muscle, and goals determines the best minimal-access technique for optimal outcomes.

Area of Science:

  • Plastic Surgery
  • Aesthetic Surgery
  • Abdominal Contouring

Background:

  • Liposuction initiated a trend towards less invasive abdominal contouring procedures.
  • Evolution of techniques necessitates analysis of patient suitability for minimal-access options.
  • Patient anatomy, goals, and recovery tolerance are key factors in technique selection.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze patient selection for advanced, less invasive abdominal contouring techniques.
  • To evaluate the efficacy of subtypes within the abdominolipoplasty system.
  • To identify criteria for choosing between extended liposuction, miniabdominoplasty, and modified abdominoplasty.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 170 patients undergoing abdominal contouring procedures.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Selection based on physical examination (skin, fat, muscle) and patient factors (goals, recovery).
  • Categorization of procedures into abdominolipoplasty subtypes (Types 1-4) and variations (1a, 2a, 3a).

    • Main Results:

    • A shift towards less invasive treatments, with 60% "closed" techniques in 1991-present vs. 40% in 1986-1991.
    • All procedures resulted in smaller or fewer incisions.
    • Skin recontouring capability is the primary physical factor in decision-making with new technologies.

    Conclusions:

    • Minimal-access abdominoplasty variations are appropriate and effective alternatives.
    • Patient selection criteria guide the choice of less invasive surgical options.
    • There is a philosophical shift towards less invasive approaches in abdominal contouring surgery.