Ultrasound Calculation of Fat Volume for Liposuction: A Clinical Software Validation

Abstract Background Fat manipulation procedures such as liposuction contain a degree of subjectivity primarily guided by the surgeon's visual or tactile perception of the underlying fat. Currently, there is no cost-effective, direct method to objectively measure fat depth and volume in real tim...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Aesthetic surgery journal 2023-09, Vol.43 (10), p.1150-1158
Main Authors: Harutyunyan, Robert, Gilardino, Mirko S, Papanastasiou, Vasilios W, Jeffries, Sean D, Hemmerling, Thomas M
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Background Fat manipulation procedures such as liposuction contain a degree of subjectivity primarily guided by the surgeon's visual or tactile perception of the underlying fat. Currently, there is no cost-effective, direct method to objectively measure fat depth and volume in real time. Objectives Utilizing innovative ultrasound-based software, the authors aimed to validate fat tissue volume and distribution measurements in the preoperative setting. Methods Eighteen participants were recruited to evaluate the accuracy of the new software. Recruited participants underwent ultrasound scans within the preoperative markings of the study area before surgery. Ultrasound-estimated fat profiles were generated with the in-house software and compared directly with the intraoperative aspirated fat recorded after gravity separation. Results Participants’ mean age and BMI were 47.6 (11.3) years and 25.6 (2.3) kg/m2, respectively. Evaluation of trial data showed promising results following the use of a Bland Altman agreement analysis. For the 18 patients and 44 volumes estimated, 43 of 44 measurements fell within a confidence interval of 95% when compared with the clinical lipoaspirate (dry) volumes collected postsurgery. The bias was estimated at 9.15 mL with a standard deviation of 17.08 mL and 95% confidence interval between −24.34 mL and 42.63 mL. Conclusions Preoperative fat assessment measurements agreed significantly with intraoperative lipoaspirate volumes. The pilot study demonstrates, for the first time, a novel companion tool with the prospect of supporting surgeons in surgical planning, measuring, and executing the transfer of adipose tissues. Level of Evidence: 4
ISSN:1090-820X
1527-330X
1527-330X
DOI:10.1093/asj/sjad121