Your search

In authors or contributors
  • Liposuction in lipedema is a safe and effective treatment, but there currently are no studies analyzing the individual complications of water-jet-assisted liposuction in lipedema or the impact of the cannula’s design.To answer the question which WAL cannula is the safest in lipedema patients, and providing practitioners with the data they need to make an informed decision about the cannula they choose.We retrospectively analyzed complications and their underlying risk factors in 117 patients across 243 cases. Groups were formed by diameter (Ø) and number of ports of the used cannulas. Unpaired t-Tests, Fisher’s exact tests and chi-squared tests were used to analyze the patients’ characteristics for the complication rates across the cannulas.Cannulas with 8 ports showed statistically significantly higher hemoglobin loss (p = 0.011), shorter incision-to-suture time (p = 0.023), and higher volume of aspirated fat (p < 0.001). The same results occurred when comparing the Ø 3.8mm cannulas that differ in the number of ports (4 versus 8 ports). The Ø 4.8mm group showed a significantly increased rate of wound healing disorders compared to the Ø 3.8mm group (p = 0.041) and a statistically significantly higher aspirated fat volume (p = 0.014).No specific cannula showed superior safety in terms of complication rates. However, 8 port cannulas facilitated a faster aspiration of large volumes and reduced the incision-to-suture time compared to 4 port cannulas. This benefit was accompanied by a grater loss of hemoglobin. In contrast, cannula diameter played a less significant role in aspiration speed and did not increase the hemoglobin loss.

  • Background: Despite its estimated high prevalence among women and increasing awareness, lipedema remains under-investigated. Ignoring its debilitating nature, surgical treatment for this condition is frequently covered by health insurance only in advanced stages and after the exhaustion of conservative therapies. Methods: A total of 1015 patients with lipedema were recruited via social media platforms. Of these, 860 patients provided answers to at least one complete section of the modified Body-Q questionnaire (response rate 85%). The Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis tests were utilized to assess the impact of the surgical treatment by means of patient-reported outcomes on the self-perception of various body areas. Results: The satisfaction scores among conservatively treated patients for abdominal appearance, arms, back, body, buttocks, and inner thighs showed a statistically significant decline with increasing stages of lipedema. The comparison of patient evaluation scores in the appearance domain demonstrated better patient self-perception scores in patients who received at least one session of the surgical treatment for the hips and thighs (p < 0.01), inner thighs (p < 0.01), and excess skin (0.01) scales. On the body scale, the patients who underwent liposuction again reported better satisfaction scores; however, this did not reach statistical significance (p < 0.081). In the health-related quality of life domain, the patients who received liposuction treatment reported a better outcome in the body image (p < 0.01), physical function (p = 0.05), physical symptoms (p = 0.04), and psychological function (p < 0.01) scales. Conclusions: The current study underscores the burden of lipedema of affected patients and its negative impact on self-perception. As the disease progresses, conservatively treated patients experience a decline in satisfaction with various aspects of their appearance. However, surgical interventions, particularly liposuction, does not address esthetic concerns but significantly improve health-related quality of life across multiple domains, emphasizing the comprehensive benefits of surgical intervention in the management of lipedema.

Last update from database: 10/7/25, 7:34 AM (UTC)

Explore

Resource type

Publication

Online resource