Intramuscular Gluteoplasty: A Comparative Study between Different Incisional Access Routes.

BACKGROUND: Silicone implants have been used to improve volume and body contour in buttocks for almost 45 years. Although the intramuscular plane continues to be the standard, surgeons still diverge on the best incision technique: using a vertical incision, and thus without the preservation of the intergluteal groove, or preserving this area through a triangular dissection. The goal of this research study was to evaluate and compare these techniques of intramuscular augmentation gluteoplasty. METHODS: Two randomized groups were formed with 53 patients in each group. One of the groups underwent intramuscular gluteoplasty with a vertical incision in the intergluteal groove, and therefore without the preservation of said intergluteal groove (group A). In the other group, intramuscular gluteoplasty was performed using a triangular dissection, thus preserving the intergluteal groove (group B). The groups were compared in relation to the incidence of complications (ie, dehiscence, hematoma, seroma, and infection). RESULTS: A total of 7.5% of patients in group A presented dehiscence and 1.9% presented seroma. In group B, however, 28.3% of patients presented dehiscence and 7.5% presented seroma and dehiscence during the first 21 days after surgery. No patient had hematoma or infection in either group. CONCLUSION: In the comparison between the groups of patients, the technique with a vertical incision in the intergluteal groove showed a lower number of surgical wounds, dehiscences, and seromas when compared with the technique that preserves the intergluteal groove. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

Long-Term Aesthetic and Functional Evaluation of Intramuscular Augmentation Gluteoplasty with Implants.

BACKGROUND: The insertion of gluteal silicone implants by intramuscular technique leads patients to develop gluteus maximus muscle atrophy. The objective of the present study was to correlate the muscular atrophy of the gluteus maximus proportional to the volume of the silicone implants used. The secondary objectives were to assess volumetry of the gluteus maximus muscle in the late follow-up, to assess the positioning of the implants, and to verify the association between volumetric muscle recovery and practice of physical exercise. METHODS: This is a prospective study. The sample was composed of 22 patients who were operated and followed up on an outpatient basis and through gluteus computed tomography at three different moments: preoperatively, 12 months postoperatively, and late postoperatively (≥96 months). RESULTS: Computed tomographic three-dimensional reconstruction and volumetric analysis showed a median atrophy of 6.68% of the gluteus maximus muscle volume in 12 months and 7.47% in the late postoperative period. The correlation between relative volume of the implant and atrophy percentage of the gluteus maximus did not present statistically significant results. There was an association between the practice of physical exercise and volumetry recovery of the gluteus maximus. No patient presented gluteal implant rotation. CONCLUSIONS: There is no correlation between proportional volume of implants and atrophy percentage of gluteus maximus muscle, when using implants up to 400 cm 3 . The gluteus maximus muscle presents atrophy in the late follow-up of augmentation gluteoplasty with implants. There is recovery of muscle volumetry in the patients who practice physical activities. Intramuscular plane implants demonstrated stability in their long-term positioning. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.