Tumescent Liposuction without Lidocaine.
Goldman JJ., Wang WZ., Fang XH., Williams SJ., Baynosa RC.
Prospective Study with a reported sample of 10, published in Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Prospective Study
- Journal
- Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open (2016)
- Country
- United States
- Reported sample size
- 10
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 27622097
- PMCID
- PMC5010320
- DOI
- 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000830
- Citations
- 13
Abstract (original English)
Background Our previous study demonstrated that lidocaine has a negative impact on adipose-derived stem cell (ASC) survival. Currently for large-volume liposuction, patients often undergo general anesthesia; therefore, lidocaine subcutaneous anesthesia is nonessential. We hypothesized that removing lidocaine from tumescent might improve stromal vascular fraction (SVF) and ASC survival from the standard tumescent with lidocaine. Ropivacaine is also a commonly used local anesthetic. The effect of ropivacaine on ASC survival was examined. Methods Adults who underwent liposuction on bilateral body areas were included (n = 10). Under general anesthesia, liposuction on 1 area was conducted under standard tumescent with lidocaine. On the contralateral side, liposuction was conducted under the modified tumescent without lidocaine. Five milliliters of lipoaspirate were processed for the isolation of SVF. The adherent ASCs were counted after 24 hours of SVF culture. Apoptosis and necrosis of SVF cells were examined by Annexin/propidium iodide staining and analyzed by flow cytometry. Results Average percentage of live SVF cells was 68.0% ± 4.0% (28.5% ± 3.8% of apoptosis and 3.4% ± 1.0% of necrosis) in lidocaine group compared with 86.7% ± 3.7% (11.5% ± 3.1% of apoptosis and 1.8% ± 0.7% of necrosis) in no-lidocaine group (P = 0.002). Average number of viable ASC was also significantly low
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.