Background <p>Abdominoplasty, especially when combined with circumferential liposuction, is a widely performed body contouring procedure with well-established aesthetic and functional benefits. However, postoperative cutaneous sensory loss in the abdominal wall remains a frequent and underexplored complication. This study aimed to prospectively map sensory changes following lipoabdominoplasty and evaluate the influence of Scarpa’s fascia preservation on recovery trajectories and quality of life.</p> Methods <p>A prospective single-center study was conducted on 60 patients (mean age 42.7 years; 93.3% female) undergoing 360-degree liposuction and lipoabdominoplasty. Patients were stratified into two groups: Scarpa-preserved (<i>n</i> = 32) and standard dissection with Scarpa removal (<i>n</i> = 28). Sensory testing included Semmes–Weinstein monofilaments, thermal discrimination, and two-point discrimination across 12 abdominal dermatomal zones (T6–L1), assessed preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using standardized questionnaires (SF-36, VAS, and POSAS). Statistical comparisons and multivariate regression were performed to identify predictors of long-term sensory deficits.</p> Results <p>At 1 month, 93.3% of patients exhibited sensory impairment, most pronounced in the infraumbilical medial (Zone 8), suprapubic (Zone 11), and supraumbilical midline (Zone 5) regions. Recovery progressed steadily: residual deficits persisted in 72.5% at 3 months, 55.0% at 6 months, and 21.7% at 12 months. Tactile, thermal, and spatial discrimination showed parallel patterns of recovery, with near-complete restitution in most cases. Preservation of Scarpa’s fascia significantly improved sensory outcomes, with better tactile thresholds (Zones 5 and 8 at 6 months, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), faster thermal recovery (Zone 11 at 3 months, <i>p</i> = 0.041), and fewer impaired dermatomes at late follow-up (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). Multivariate analysis identified higher BMI, standard dissection (Scarpa removal), and greater resection weight (&gt;1000&#xa0;g) as independent predictors of persistent hypoesthesia. Patient-reported maps correlated strongly with objective findings (<i>r</i> = 0.81, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Quality-of-life scores and scar satisfaction were significantly higher in the Scarpa-preserved group at 12 months.</p> Conclusions <p>Cutaneous sensory loss is an almost universal early sequela of lipoabdominoplasty but typically resolves within 12 months. Preservation of Scarpa’s fascia confers measurable neuroprotective effects, reducing long-term deficits and enhancing patient satisfaction. Incorporating comprehensive sensory evaluation into surgical planning and patient counseling may improve functional and aesthetic outcomes.</p> Level of Evidence II <p>This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors <a href="http://www.springer.com/00266">www.springer.com/00266</a>.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Cutaneous Sensory Loss After Lipoabdominoplasty: A Prospective Quantitative Mapping Study with Functional and Quality-of-Life Correlations

  • Agostino Bruno,
  • Marco Schirosi,
  • Valerio Saccoccio

摘要

Background

Abdominoplasty, especially when combined with circumferential liposuction, is a widely performed body contouring procedure with well-established aesthetic and functional benefits. However, postoperative cutaneous sensory loss in the abdominal wall remains a frequent and underexplored complication. This study aimed to prospectively map sensory changes following lipoabdominoplasty and evaluate the influence of Scarpa’s fascia preservation on recovery trajectories and quality of life.

Methods

A prospective single-center study was conducted on 60 patients (mean age 42.7 years; 93.3% female) undergoing 360-degree liposuction and lipoabdominoplasty. Patients were stratified into two groups: Scarpa-preserved (n = 32) and standard dissection with Scarpa removal (n = 28). Sensory testing included Semmes–Weinstein monofilaments, thermal discrimination, and two-point discrimination across 12 abdominal dermatomal zones (T6–L1), assessed preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using standardized questionnaires (SF-36, VAS, and POSAS). Statistical comparisons and multivariate regression were performed to identify predictors of long-term sensory deficits.

Results

At 1 month, 93.3% of patients exhibited sensory impairment, most pronounced in the infraumbilical medial (Zone 8), suprapubic (Zone 11), and supraumbilical midline (Zone 5) regions. Recovery progressed steadily: residual deficits persisted in 72.5% at 3 months, 55.0% at 6 months, and 21.7% at 12 months. Tactile, thermal, and spatial discrimination showed parallel patterns of recovery, with near-complete restitution in most cases. Preservation of Scarpa’s fascia significantly improved sensory outcomes, with better tactile thresholds (Zones 5 and 8 at 6 months, p < 0.05), faster thermal recovery (Zone 11 at 3 months, p = 0.041), and fewer impaired dermatomes at late follow-up (p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis identified higher BMI, standard dissection (Scarpa removal), and greater resection weight (>1000 g) as independent predictors of persistent hypoesthesia. Patient-reported maps correlated strongly with objective findings (r = 0.81, p < 0.001). Quality-of-life scores and scar satisfaction were significantly higher in the Scarpa-preserved group at 12 months.

Conclusions

Cutaneous sensory loss is an almost universal early sequela of lipoabdominoplasty but typically resolves within 12 months. Preservation of Scarpa’s fascia confers measurable neuroprotective effects, reducing long-term deficits and enhancing patient satisfaction. Incorporating comprehensive sensory evaluation into surgical planning and patient counseling may improve functional and aesthetic outcomes.

Level of Evidence II

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.