Reconstructive pelvic surgery and plastic surgery: safety and efficacy of combined surgery

• Published in: American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2008-01, Vol.199 (6), p.701.e1-701.e5
• Main Authors: Craig, Jocelyn B., MD, Noblett, Karen L., MD, Conner, Caroline A., MD, Budd, Michael, MD, Lane, Felicia L., MD
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: abdominoplasty; Adult; Biological and medical sciences; Case-Control Studies; Chi-Square Distribution; Combined Modality Therapy; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics; Humans; Lipectomy - methods; Mammaplasty - methods; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Obstetrics and Gynecology; Patient Satisfaction; pelvic reconstructive surgery; plastic surgery; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Probability; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures - methods; recurrent incontinence; Retrospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Suburethral Slings; Surgery, Plastic - methods; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Incontinence, Stress - diagnosis; Urinary Incontinence, Stress - surgery; Uterine Prolapse - diagnosis; Uterine Prolapse - surgery
• ISSN: 0002-9378; 1097-6868
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.07.053

Objective The purpose of this study was to address the safety of combining aesthetic and pelvic floor reconstructive procedures. Study Design Fifty-four subjects were included in a case-control study; 18 patients undergoing combined pelvic and plastic reconstructive surgery, age and procedure matched to 18 pelvic surgery and 18 plastic surgery only controls. Chi-square, t test, and Kruskal-Wallis analysis were used to compare the estimated blood loss (EBL), body mass index (BMI), hospital days, operative times, and complications between the groups. Results No differences were seen with regards to age, BMI, or EBL. There was, however, a significant increase in minor complications and hospital stay after combined procedures relative to the pelvic surgery control group but not the aesthetic control group. Operative times were only greater during combined procedures relative to isolated pelvic floor procedures. Conclusion Combining pelvic and aesthetic procedures may increase complications, operative times, and length of hospital stay when compared to pelvic reconstructive surgery alone.