Sub-Scarpa's Lipectomy in Abdominoplasty: An Analysis of Risks and Rewards in 723 Consecutive Patients.

<bold>Background: </bold>During the course of performing abdominoplasties, a plastic surgeon will encounter a certain body habitus characterized by a thick, tethered, and excessively redundant upper skin flap. Often these patients also demonstrate diffuse and substantial fascial laxity. One approach to this problem involves direct thinning and release of the flap by resection of the sub-Scarpa's fat pad. In theory, this resection should be safe from a flap perfusion standpoint. However, the safety of the sub-Scarpa's resection has not been completely documented.<bold>Objectives: </bold>The author sought to assess the safety and efficacy of sub-Scarpa's lipectomy in abdominoplasty.<bold>Methods: </bold>A total 723 patients were retrospectively examined and divided into 2 groups: those with (Group B) and those without (Group A) a sub-Scarpa's lipectomy component to the abdominoplasty. Because of differences in the baseline characteristics between the 2 groups, data analysis was performed with a logistic regression model and with propensity score matching.<bold>Results: </bold>The sub-Scarpa's lipectomy technique allowed for substantial thinning of the flap: the average weight of the resected fat pad was 411 g. Wide undermining allowed for substantial fascial correction, and excellent results were obtainable even in challenging cases. The sub-Scarpa's lipectomy group did not demonstrate an increase in either minor (<5 cm2) or major (>5 cm2) flap necrosis. However, there was a statistically significant increase in fat necrosis and seroma formation in Group B compared with Group A. In both groups, an increasing body mass index was a risk factor for fat necrosis and major flap necrosis.<bold>Conclusions: </bold>The implementation of a sub-Scarpa's lipectomy during abdominoplasty is a useful technique to consider for selected abdominoplasty candidates. The risks of minor and major flap loss do not seem to be increased compared to the standard abdominoplasty, but the risks of fat necrosis and seroma formation may be greater.<bold>Level Of Evidence:4: </bold> [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]