title: Tumescent liposuction versus internal ultrasonic-assisted tumescent liposuction. A side-to-side comparison.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Tumescent liposuction (TL) performed according to accepted guidelines has proven to be a safe and effective outpatient procedure. The recent introduction of internal ultrasonic assistance may be a beneficial adjunct to the proven technique of tumescent liposuction at no additional risk to the patient.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To determine whether there are differences in the intra- and postoperative course and the final cosmetic result between TL and internal ultrasonic-assisted tumescent liposuction (I-UATL) with a device using a double-lumen, saline-cooled cannula.
  
  
  METHODS
  Twenty-eight patients were enrolled in a randomized, prospective, side-to-side comparative study of TL with and without internal ultrasonic assistance. Intraoperative data including patient and physician observations are reported. A blinded evaluation was performed by the nonoperating surgeon of postoperative bruising, swelling, nodularity, skin retraction, decrease in cellulite, and symmetry at regular intervals after the procedure. Patients assessed variables concurrently.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In most cases, the surgeon sensed a greater ease of cannula motion on the I-UATL side, associated with less physician exertion and fatigue. Patients tended to note a more pleasant intraoperative experience on the I-UATL side. We found no significant difference in the degree of postoperative bruising, nodularity, skin retraction, or decreased cellulite as evaluated by the observing physician, although swelling at 1 week was greater on the I-UATL side. The degree of bruising, swelling, soreness, numbness, skin retraction, or decrease in cellulite as reported by the patient did not differ significantly. There were no major complications attributable to either technique.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This study suggests that the addition of internal ultrasonic assistance to the tumescent liposuction procedure may be advantageous regarding less physician effort and increased patient comfort during the procedure. We have not shown a significant difference in the postoperative course or the final cosmetic result when comparing TL with I-UATL.
authors.forename: H
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Igra
authors.forename: N M
authors.initials: NM
authors.lastname: Satur
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000772:Anesthesia, Local / Q000379:methods; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D015187:Lipectomy / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014464:Ultrasonic Therapy / Q000379:methods*