Buttock Augmentation with Implants and Fat Grafting: A Comparative Study

Abstract

Introduction:

We sought to compare our experience in the 2 primary techniques for buttock augmentation and determine if one is clearly superior to the other from the standpoints of complications, postoperative pain, and patient satisfaction.

Materials and Methods:

A retrospective search of patient records was performed for the period 2008–2011. A total of 129 patients were identified as having undergone buttock augmentation, 33 via fat transfer with stem cell therapy and 96 by way of silicone prosthesis. Complications were tabulated. Medcalc version 12.1 was used for analysis.

Results:

Over a 4-year period, we found that a total of 96 implant augmentations had been performed versus 33 fat-grafting augmentations. The overall satisfaction of the patients receiving buttock augmentation was 76.0% (73/96) for augmentation with implants and 69.7% (23/33) for augmentation with fat, which was statistically significant (P < .001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 67.93–71.47). Seroma formation was more prevalent in the implant group (3.0% versus 17.7%; P = .02; 95% CI, 0.070–15.7). Lumps or dents were more prevalent in the fat-grafting group (33.3% versus 2.1%; P < .0001; 95% CI, 17.9–51.8). Complications isolated to those undergoing implant augmentation included dehiscence (14.6%) and contracture (13.5%).

Conclusions:

Although fat grafting for buttock augmentation is rising in popularity among surgeons, its results are not as consistent as those seen with buttock implant augmentation. This consistency of results is offset by the risk of capsular contracture and dehiscence, which are seen in implant surgery. Cosmetic surgeons should be aware of both techniques in buttock augmentation and their respective risks and benefits.