title: Buttock augmentation with silicone implants: a multicenter survey review of 2226 patients.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Enhancement of buttock volume with gluteal silicone implants has been performed by surgeons for over 30 years, but no studies have examined complication rates or outcomes of more than single-surgeon experiences. Numerous technical differences in how gluteal augmentation surgery with implants is performed also exist, and to date, surgeon preferences for implant plane, incisional access, implant type, and drain use have not been quantified.
  
  
  METHODS
  A 10-question survey was sent to 83 targeted members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons requesting information about number of cases performed, duration of surgeon experience, implant placement plane and incisional access, implant type, length of typical surgery, use of drains and antibiotic irrigation solution, surgeon satisfaction and surgeon assessment of patient satisfaction, and number of complications experienced.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Nineteen respondents (25 percent response rate) provided data on 2226 patients. Thirteen respondents (68.4 percent) favored the intramuscular plane of dissection over the subfascial plane. Preference for incisional access was nearly equally divided between a single incision in the gluteal cleft (10 respondents) and two incisions separated within the cleft (nine respondents). The total number of complications reported was 848 (38.1 percent).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Gluteal augmentation with silicone implants has gained popularity in the last decade. Despite this, no previous studies have examined multisurgeon experiences with this procedure to determine complication rates or surgeon technical preferences. The authors present data from a survey sent to experienced gluteal augmentation surgeons. Advances in technique and implant options are needed to improve complication rates experienced with this procedure.
authors.affiliation: La Jolla and San Marcos, Calif.; São Paulo, Brazil; Huizquilucan, Mexico; Miami, Fla.; and New York, N.Y. From the Division of Plastic Surgery, University of California San Diego; Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Ribeirão Preto; private practice; and College of Business Administration, California State University.
authors.forename: M Mark
authors.initials: MM
authors.lastname: Mofid
authors.forename: Raul
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Gonzalez
authors.forename: José Abel
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: de la Peña
authors.forename: Constantino G
authors.initials: CG
authors.lastname: Mendieta
authors.forename: Douglas M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Senderoff
authors.forename: Soheila
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Jorjani
mesh_terms: D002081:Buttocks / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000209:etiology; D019736:Prostheses and Implants / Q000009:adverse effects; D019651:Plastic Surgery Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D020034:Silicone Gels / Q000009:adverse effects; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
chemical_list: D020034:Silicone Gels
references.citation: Gonzalez R. Gluteal implants: The XYZ intramuscular method. Aesthet Surg J. 2010;30:256–264.
references.citation: Bruner TW, Roberts TL, Nguyen K. Complications of buttock augmentation: Diagnosis, management, and prevention. Clin Plast Surg. 2006;33:449–466.
references.citation: Mendieta CG. Gluteal reshaping. Aesthet Surg J. 2007;27:641–655.
references.citation: Senderoff DM. Buttock augmentation with solid silicone implants. Aesthet Surg J. 2011;31:320–327.
references.citation: Mendieta CG. Gluteoplasty. Aesthet Surg J. 2003;23:441–455.
references.citation: Vergara R. Intramuscular gluteal implants: 15 years' experience. Aesthet Surg J. 2003;23:86–91.
references.citation: Hidalgo JE. Submuscular gluteal augmentation: 17 years' experience with gel and elastomer silicone implants. Clin Plast Surg. 2006;33:435–447.
references.citation: de la Peña JA. Subfascial technique for gluteal augmentation. Aesthet Surg J. 2004;24:265–273.