Conventional versus ultrasound-assisted liposuction in gynaecomastia surgery: a 13-year review.

[BACKGROUND] Numerous surgical techniques exist for gynaecomastia treatment. Although ultrasound-assisted liposuction (UAL) is thought to be more effective than conventional liposuction, to date there remains no objective and direct comparison of the two modalities. Hence, a comparative study was performed of a single surgeon's experience over 13 years using two definitive parameters, namely intraoperative conversion to open excision and postoperative revisional surgery rates.

[METHODS] All gynaecomastia patients treated with UAL or conventional liposuction (1999-2012) were retrospectively studied. UAL was only available in the private sector and was used for all such patients with no other selection or exclusion criteria.

[RESULTS] A total of 219 patients (384 breasts) with a mean age of 29 years (range 12-74) were evaluated. UAL was utilised in 24% of breasts (47 patients, 91 breasts). Compared with conventional liposuction, UAL had significantly lower rates of intraoperative conversion to open excision (25% vs. 39%; p<0.05) and postoperative revision (2% vs. 19%; p<0.001) using Fisher's exact test. The haematoma rate for each technique was 1%.

[CONCLUSION] UAL is a more effective treatment modality for gynaecomastia than conventional liposuction as determined by intraoperative conversion to open surgery and subsequent need for revision.