Another American Dies During Plastic Surgery in Mexico

Another awful tale of a Southern Californian who died as a result of a botch job from a disreputable Mexican plastic surgeon.  From 10news.com...

Lourdes Trinidad Died After Liposuction Procedure Performed By Dr. Louis May Villanueva

CHULA VISTA, Calif. -- A local doctor who may have overstated his credentials is being held responsible for the death of a Chula Vista woman he operated on recently.

 

According to family members, 48-year-old Lourdes Trinidad underwent a liposuction procedure performed by Dr. Louis May Villanueva of Bonita.

 

Family members said Trinidad was a healthy and active pharmacy technician who opted for liposuction and went to May's Millennium Cosmetic and Laser Institute in Tijuana for the procedure.

 

"The doctor assured her it was real simple, it was a real simple procedure," said Trinidad's brother, Sergio Salazar.

 

It ended up becoming a deadly procedure, although Trinidad's family has yet to receive a good explanation as to why it turned out that way.

 

"We're just shocked and we're amazed that a doctor like that could just leave, could leave her there by herself," said Trinidad's brother, Bernard.

 

Trinidad's mother is warning others, not just because of her daughter's death, but what happened after. The family said May disappeared.

 

"He was nowhere to be found ... The doctor was gone," said Salazar.

 

The family said after Trinidad's accounts were frozen when she died Saturday, May still wanted his $2,000.

 

"On Monday, we get a call from the bank that said he tried to cash it. He had the nerve to try to cash the check that killed her," said Bernard Trinidad.

 

10News visited May's Bonita home for his version of events, but he was not there.

 

May said he is a member of the American Academy of Cosmetic Surgery, but 10News learned from academy officials that he is not a member.

 

Additionally, May also claims membership in the American College of Phlebology, but any member of the public who wants to learn about leg veins is allowed to join.

 

"We don't want any money from him. We want to stop him from doing this again to someone else," said Bernard Trinidad.

 

Trinidad's family will bury her Thursday, and they continue to question whether it was a complication or incompetence that led to her death.

 

10News contacted May's clinic and they said they did not have any information right now.

 

10news also contacted the Ministry of Health in Tijuana to determine if May is fully licensed, but there has been no response.

Please beware of plastic surgery in Mexico.  While there are many excellent physicians south of the border, it can be very difficult for an American to vet the qualifications of her Mexican doctor.  Even when tragedy doesn't strike, standard "botch jobs" end up costing the patient much more than she would have saved had she seen a Board Certified Plastic Surgeon in the USA.  Make wise choices.

A Full Tummy Tuck (With or Without Circumferential Extension) Will Best Correct the Upper Belly and Bellybutton

I've lost 100 lbs. after having a Lap Band put in nearly 4 years ago.  My stomach issues are very unique looking, which is why I'm having the difficulty in determining what procedure I need.  My unwanted fat and loose skin are mainly only above the bellybutton, like they're sitting on a shelf.  I am unsure of which procedure would benefit me the most among simple liposuction, a modified Tummy Tuck, a full Tummy Tuck, or extended.  I'm open to any other suggestions as well.  I believe my skin has shrunk back as much as it can already.  Thoughts?

First and foremost, congratulations on your weight loss!  What a wonderful transformation. In addition to your improved health, your figure already looks terrific.

Second, even though you might think that your tummy has "unique" issues, nothing could be further from reality. I see at least one patient per week whose tummy looks like yours.

Third, go for a full tummy tuck.

• After 4 years, your skin is not going to shrink on its own any farther--no matter how much exercise you do.
• Liposuction will not be helpful to treat the upper tummy (called the epigastrium) and bellybutton. Since liposuction is a fat removal technique (without any significant skin tightening), liposuction is the wrong answer.  You are already skinny!  The problem is too much skin without good tone, not excess fat.
• Mini tummy tucks are nonsense operations. I have never found the right patient for a mini tummy tuck--even after 8 years of practice!  A mini tummy tuck is for that very rare patient whose problem area is limited to her lower middle abdomen, just above her pubis.  Obviously, this is not where you are concerned.
• A standard tummy tuck will work.  To minimize "dog ear" formation on the bilateral hips, weight-loss patients generally get their best results when the tummy tuck is extended all the way around circumferentially.  Whether you choose to keep the surgery just in the front or all the way around will be your decision.  Both are good choices, but the circumferential technique generally produces better contours.
• Do not do a fleur-di-lis abdominoplasty.  The vertical portion of the scar is ugly, and the operation is now recognized as obsolete.  If any doctor offers you this surgery, run away!  He is out of date!!

Fourth, make sure that your lap band port is exchanged from a high-profile to a low-profile.  Now that you are thin, the low-profile port will be less visible.  You don't need that extra prominence to find the port anyway; you've got no subcutaneous fat.  (Congratulations again!)

Fifth, make sure that your surgeon is certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery.  And, better yet, research whether he specializes in weight-loss patients.  I do a lot of post-bariatric contouring, and let me tell you that weight-loss patients are very different from "regular" plastic surgery patients.  Your surgeon needs the expertise only garnered from years of experience with your peer group.

Good luck!

Tissue Glue Rather Than Drains (?!)

There is an old surgical adage:

If a surgeon thinks that the patient might benefit from a drain, he should put it in.  A surgeon never regrets placing a drain.

Patients, however, hate drains.  They are a post-operative nuisance.  Most patients grudgingly accept drains because they minimize fluid collections (called seromata) and infections.

Since drains are so uncomfortable, there have been a number of products and techniques developed to obviate the need for drains....

• Quilting sutures beneath tissue flaps to minimize "dead space"
• Tissue glues

Biological tissues glues are particularly exciting because they are quick, effective, and precise.  Unfortunately, there have been no specific research studies which have rigorously documented the safety and efficacy of biological glues for plastic surgery.  A study published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in 2008 proved the success of tissue glues in a canine abdominoplasty ("tummy tuck") model; however, dog and human tissues do respond differently, and the results of an animal model can not necessarily be generalized to human beings.

To investigate human plastic surgery patients' response to biological glues, Cohera Medical, Inc., has just enrolled its first few patients in a study of its TissuGlu.  The clinical investigation is a prospective, open-label, randomized study to investigate the safety of TissuGlu, its effect on wound drainage, and its relationship to complications.  The study will compare 40 abdominoplasty patients in Bonn, Frankfurt, and Freiburg, Germany, who will undergo...

standard wound closure techniques versus

standard wound closure techniques plus the application of TissuGlu

Currently, patients who undergo abdominoplasties require the insertion of one or more drains to remove fluids that accumulate under the skin at the surgical site.  (The old surgical adage remains true in tummy tucks!)  However, TissuGlu will hopefully adhere the flaps created during the procedure to reduce fluid accumulation, and, ultimately, the duration of use of surgical drains.  With the use of TissuGlu, patients may experience a reduction in fluid accumulation, a more comfortable recovery, and a quicker return to normal activity.

If the European trial goes favorably, Cohera will apply for a larger U.S.-based trial later this year.  Let's say our prayers that TissuGlu works!...

ATX-101: FDA Approval for Dissolving Fat (?!)

Maybe, I shouldn't have been so quick to disparage injection lipolysis.  Kythera Pharmaceutical's ATX-101 just might prove me wrong.

Back in November 2009, I called attention to the farce of injection lipolysis and mesotherapy, also known as...

• LipoZap
• Lipostabil
• Flabjab
• Lipomelt
• Lipodissolve
• Fat-Away

http://www.pickartplasticsurgeryblog.com/2009/11/whatever-happened-to-lipozap.html

Mesotherapy, injection lipolysis, LipoZap, etc., involved injecting bile acids beneath the skin to melt fat--or at least that was the hope.  Compelling advertising enabled LipoZap centers to spring up throughout the United States and Europe.  As is so often the case, clever marketing preceded any clever science.  Without appropriate testing for safety and efficacy, many patients were swindled, and some were seriously harmed.

Enter Kythera Pharmaceuticals.  Led by executives and researchers from the established biotechnology industry (such as Amgen and Allergan), Kythera seems grounded in science and safety.  ATX-101 is Kythera's fat buster.  Preliminary trials have been completed for dissolving lipomas--benign fatty tumors, affecting 2% of the population, which can be painful and cosmetically displeasing.

The traditional treatment for lipomas has always been surgical excision.  However, surgery always entails risks, such as scarring, infection, damage to critical structures like nerves, etc.  The hope is that ATX-101 will significantly reduce the size or eliminate lipomas without the need for surgery.

If ATX-101 were to work on lipomas, then I don't see why it shouldn't work on those stubborn fat deposits that we have inherited from our parents.  Analogous to current lipoma treatments, stubborn fat is now removed with surgery--liposuction.  Wouldn't it be nice to sign up for a few injections rather than a surgical procedure (albeit a minor one)?

No Insurance Company Will Pay for a Tummy Tuck

I have a PPO.  How can I get my insurance company to pay for a tummy tuck?  Or will I have to pay for it out of pocket?

-Andy in Ventura, California

Dear Andy,

I think that you are confusing 2 separate procedures:

• panniculectomy
• abdominoplasty

A panniculectomy is a functional procedure for removing excess skin and fat.  An insurance company MAY authorize a panniculectomy if...

• The apron of excess abdominal skin impedes walking.
• The apron of excess abdominal skin impedes normal groin hygiene.
• There are recalcitrant fungal infections beneath the skin folds.
• The fungal infections have progressed to bacterial infections, necessitating hospitalization and IV antibiotics.

A panniculectomy is NOT an attractive operation.  The goal is function, not cosmesis.

• There is no tailoring of the skin excess.
• There is no liposuction to contour the flanks.
• The bellybutton is not preserved.
• The muscles are not tightened.
• The abdomen is not optimally flattened.

If your goals are functional, then you should consider a panniculectomy.  Find a Board Certified Plastic Surgeon who accepts your insurance, and then speak with him/her frankly.

If, however, your goals are to have a more attractive torso, then you are looking for an abdominoplasty, better known as a tummy tuck.  An abdominoplasty will take care of everything that a panniculectomy will, but it will also do more....

• The extra skin and fat (that creates the "apron" and/or the "roll") will be removed.
• The skin will be pulled taut, and will be tailored to your frame.
• The bellybutton is reconstructed and rejuvenated.
• The "six-pack" muscles are tightened.
• The abdomen is flattened.
• Often, some liposuction is done on the flanks to optimize the waist.

Obviously, no insurance company is going to pay for you to look cuter.  Medical insurance is supposed to help defray medical expenses.  An unattractive belly is not a medical problem; it is an aesthetic issue.  So, an abdominoplasty would be your financial responsibility.

There is one more caveat:  Sometimes, a patient suffers medical problems from an abdominal "apron."  Moreover, he/she wants not only functional relief but also aesthetic improvement.  In this circumstance, the surgeon can help the patient obtain authorization for a panniculectomy.  The patient might then pay the difference for a full tummy tuck.  In effect, the patient is getting the best of both worlds:  functional improvement (covered by the insurance company) and cosmetic enhancement.  Check out this example below...

 

Breast Implants: Consideration #9: Complications

Are you willing to accept potential complications

asdf

asdf

asdf

poor scarring, bleeding, infection, malposition, asymmetry, capsular contracture, finite life span of implants, wrong size

Breast Implants: Consideration #8: Adjunctive Procedures? Lift Up? Lipo?

Adjunctive procedures

lipo of the anterior axilla or armpits or water wings

lift up

change shape, such as for constricted breasts

Breast Implants: Consideration #7: Size

not to exceed your body's frame

not to exceed your skin's elasticity

enough to fill the envelope

err on the bigger side

Volumes to go up by a size

32 250

34 300

36 350

38 400

40 ?

Gel is smaller than saline by 8%; go for bigger for gel

 

short, medium, or high profile

Breast Implants: Consideration #6: Position of Implants - Above or Below Muscle

 

asd

f

 

• Subglandular implant:  The prosthesis is placed under the breast tissue but on top of the pectoralis major muscle.
• Subpectoral implant (or submuscular implant):  The prosthesis is placed behind the pectoralis major muscle (which is itself behind the breast gland).

Obviously, Holly, you deserve a customized evaluation, and only then can a Board Certified Plastic Surgeon help you make the best decision.  Nevertheless, there are some general advantages and disadvantages of the two options....

Subglandular Implants

Advantages:

• Technically easier operation for the surgeon
• Can be placed without general anesthesia (without going totally to sleep)
• Larger implants can be accomodated
• Potentially, more cleavage can be created
• No surgery on the muscle; therefore, less discomfort
• No surgery on the muscle; therefore, faster recovery time
• More "lift" effect, so that formal breast up-lift operations can be avoided

Disadvantages

• The "look" tends to be more artificial and less natural
• More rippling
• Greater likelihood of capsular contracture
• More difficult to interpret mammograms

Subpectoral Implants

Advantages

• Usually, a more natural breast appearance
• Less rippling
• Lower risk of capsular contracture
• More successful mammogram readings

Disadvantages

• More difficult operation
• Requires general anesthesia
• Can not always produce as much cleavage as the patient might desire
• More discomfort
• Longer recovery time
• Among women with large pectoralis majors, muscle contraction can distort the implant

Practically speaking, I try to convince most of my patients here in Ventura, California (>90%) to undergo subpectoral placements.  The unusual exceptions...

• Extreme fear of general anesthesia
• Very low pain tolerance
• Looking for a "fake" look
• High performance athletes, whose pectoralis major muscles should not be altered
• Body builders, in whom muscle flexion would distort their breasts during competitions
• Male-to-female transsexuals, whose large XY pectoralis major muscles would not accomodate a subpectoral implant

I like saline implants above the muscle when the patient...

• ...already has a fair amount of breast tissue.
  • Saline implants tend to ripple more than silicone.
  • Hence, those implants need some sort of coverage to camouflage that rippling.
  • That coverage can come from the muscle or from breast tissue.
  • If a woman's breasts are already big, but she would like them even bigger, placing implants on top of the muscle is usually OK.
• ...wants the most natural results when she exercises (nearly) naked(!)
  • The breasts are naturally on top of the muscles.
  • Therefore, if the muscles move, the overlying breasts shouldn't move that much.
  • However, if the implants are beneath the muscles, the breasts might move unnaturally when the muscles contract.
  • Since most women don't exercise naked, this is a minor issue for most patients.
  • Nevertheless, some women do compete in sports in small bikinis, and they are aware of breast distortions with shoulder/chest muscle contractions (such as beach volleyball players, surfers, body builders...see below)
• ...is a body builder.
  • Body builders have very well developed muscles.
  • Contraction of those big muscles would significantly distort the positions of sub-muscular implants.
  • These women do pose nearly naked (in small bikinis) while flexing their muscles.
  • Even though these women do not have a lot of body fat, implants on top of the muscle are generally better.
  • In competitions, the rippling of the implants looks less bad than implant distortion.
• ...has droopy breasts and prefers to avoid formal lift-up procedures
  • Implants themselves provide breast rejuvenation.
  • The muscles tend to mute the rejuvenative/lift-up effects of breast augmentations.
  • Even though many women need mastopexies (lift-up surgeries) at the same time as their augmentations, some patients prefer to avoid the additional scars of mastopexies and accept the limitations of implants on top of the muscles.
• ...is looking for a quicker recovery
  • Most breast implants surgeries do not require a long recovery.
  • However, positioning of the implants below the muscle is more uncomfortable.
  • Staying on top of the muscle is much less painful.

Generally, I use silicone implants when patients choose to have their augmentations on top of the muscle.  Or, better yet, I place implants beneath the muscle in 90% of circumstances...

• to minimize rippling
• to reduce excess scar tissue around the implants (known as capsular contracture)

• Subglandular implant:  The prosthesis is placed under the breast tissue but on top of the pectoralis major muscle.
• Subpectoral implant (or submuscular implant):  The prosthesis is placed behind the pectoralis major muscle (which is itself behind the breast gland).

Obviously, Holly, you deserve a customized evaluation, and only then can a Board Certified Plastic Surgeon help you make the best decision.  Nevertheless, there are some general advantages and disadvantages of the two options....

Subglandular Implants

Advantages:

• Technically easier operation for the surgeon
• Can be placed without general anesthesia (without going totally to sleep)
• Larger implants can be accomodated
• Potentially, more cleavage can be created
• No surgery on the muscle; therefore, less discomfort
• No surgery on the muscle; therefore, faster recovery time
• More "lift" effect, so that formal breast up-lift operations can be avoided

Disadvantages

• The "look" tends to be more artificial and less natural
• More rippling
• Greater likelihood of capsular contracture
• More difficult to interpret mammograms

Subpectoral Implants

Advantages

• Usually, a more natural breast appearance
• Less rippling
• Lower risk of capsular contracture
• More successful mammogram readings

Disadvantages

• More difficult operation
• Requires general anesthesia
• Can not always produce as much cleavage as the patient might desire
• More discomfort
• Longer recovery time
• Among women with large pectoralis majors, muscle contraction can distort the implant

Practically speaking, I try to convince most of my patients here in Ventura, California (>90%) to undergo subpectoral placements.  The unusual exceptions...

• Extreme fear of general anesthesia
• Very low pain tolerance
• Looking for a "fake" look
• High performance athletes, whose pectoralis major muscles should not be altered
• Body builders, in whom muscle flexion would distort their breasts during competitions
• Male-to-female transsexuals, whose large XY pectoralis major muscles would not accomodate a subpectoral implant

Breast Implants: Consideration #5: Location of Incision

There are four commonly used incisions for breast augmentations.

1. Inframammary fold - a gently curved incision in the fold beneath the breast
2. Periareolar - a semicircular incision around the lower half of the areola
3. Transaxillary - a straight incision in an armpit crease
4. Transumbilical - a curved incision in the upper half of the umblicus

According to a recent study published in the Aesthetic Surgery Journal, Board Certified Plastic Surgeons in the USA prefer the inframammary fold and periareolar approaches.  The actual percentages of Board Certified Plastic Surgeons who prefer a particular approach...

1. Inframammary fold - 64%
2. Periareolar - 25%
3. Transaxillary - 8.7%
4. Transumbilical - 0.4%

Why is the inframammary approach most popular?

• Most versatile:  Any type of implant (saline or silicone, round or tear drop, smooth or textured, small or large) can be placed through this incision.  The inframammary approach allows access into either of the available pockets (under the breast or under the breast + muscle).
• Useful for secondary surgery:  Hopefully, you will not need a second (or third) surgery.  However, most implants will not last the lifetime of a women undergoing primary breast augmentations in her 30s.  She should plan on additional procedures.  The inframammary incision can be reused again and again for replacements of implants, corrections of problems, etc.
• Excellent precision:  Because the incision is directly beneath the breast, the surgeon can see what he is doing.  Any bleeding can be immediately stopped.  The pocket domain can be precisely controlled.  There is no need for guesswork.
• Distant from nerves and milk ducts:  Because the inframammary incision is away from nerves and milk ducts, there should (theoretically) be a decreased incidence of nipple numbness and fewer difficulties with subsequent breast feeding.  Moreover, since milk ducts may contain bacteria, remaining distant to bacteria may reduce a patient's risk of infection.
• Good aesthetics:  Inframammary scars tend to heal well; scars rarely hypertrophy (become thick and raised).  Moreover, since an attractive breast has a subtle "hang," the mound should itself obscure the resultant scar.  At the minimum, the inframammary scar should fall within the shadow of the breast.
• Limitations:  Very, very few.
• • Rare patients may have so little natural breast tissue that they don't really have folds; these patients may benefit from another approach.
  • Constricted breasts may be better treated with periareolar incisions.  (Constricted breasts are tight breasts with little tissue other than immediately behind the areolae.)
  • Others may object to the scar, but they must remember that the other scars (periareolar, transaxillary, and transumbilical) may be more advantageous only in the short term.  If those patients need secondary surgery, they are probably going to end up with inframammary incisions anyway.  Then, they have two sets of scars. 

Why is the periareolar incision also frequently used?

• Somewhat versatile:  Many types of implants can be placed through this incision; however, large silicone implants cannot always be placed through small areolae.  Tear-drop-shaped implants may be difficult to maneuver through small areolae too.  Both the subglandular and subpectoral pockets can be created through this incision.
• Particularly useful for constricted/tubular breasts:  The areola can be reduced in size at the same time.
• Can be useful for some secondary surgeries:  Some secondary surgeries can be performed through this approach.  However, on other occasions, the surgeon must convert to an inframammary technique.
• Excellent precision:  Like the inframammary incision, the periareolar approach allows for great control and precision.
• Good aesthetics:  Periareolar scars may be somewhat invisible.  For maximum camouflage, some plastic surgeons advocate tattooing any visible scars with ink similar in color to the patient's natural areolae.
• Limitations:  Some.  But this is still a useful technique.
• • If the patient has small areolae, then the periareolar incisions may not allow for placements of large silicone implants or tear-drop-shaped implants.
  • Some secondary surgeries may still require an inframammary approach.
  • Periareolar incisions may be more likely to damage the nerves that supply nipple sensation.  If erogenous nipple sensitivity is important to the patient, this may not be the best approach.
  • Periareolar incision may be more likely to damage milk ducts.  If the patient might breast feed in the future, then this may not be the best choice.

What are the problems with the transaxillary approach?

• Only somewhat versatile:  Saline implants can be easily placed through the armpit.  However, it is difficult to place even moderate-sized silicone implants through the transaxillary incision.  It would be very difficult (if not impossible) to place tear-drop-shaped implants through this approach.  Both the subglandular and subpectoral pockets can be created through this incision.
• Not useful for most secondary surgeries:  Most of these patients will end up requiring a second set of incisions (probably at the inframammary folds.  Then, they are stuck with four incisions, rather than just two.)
• Reduced precision:  Unless complex endoscopic equipment is used to improve visualization, precision is markedly reduced.
• Usually, good aesthetics:  If the scar heals nicely, then the breast itself has no scars (until the secondary procedures).  However, some of these incisions heal thick.  Then, the patient is stuck with scars that other people will see when she wears routine clothes, such as tank tops.
• Limitations:  Many.  I don't use this technique anymore.
• • While some surgeons claim that they can place small silicone implants through transaxillary incisions, they certainly cannot get medium or large silicone implants through this approach.
  • It would be very difficult to orient tear-drop-shaped implants via the armpits.
  • Secondary surgeries can only very infrequently be performed through the under arms.  Usually, these patients will require inframammary incisions.
  • Without complex endoscopic equipment, visualization is impaired.  Could there be a greater likelihood for bleeding complications and for malpositioned implants?

Why is the transumbilical breast augmentation (TUBA) condemned?

• This is a novelty technique.  Most Board Certified Plastic Surgeons think that it is foolish.
• No versatility regarding implant type:  Only round, saline implants are possible with the TUBA.  It would be impossible to place a silicone implant or a tear-drop-shaped implant with this technique.
• No subpectoral placement:  Only subglandular placement is possible.
• Not at all useful for secondary surgeries, under any circumstances.
• Poor precision:  Most of the patients complain that at least one of the two breasts is "off to the side" or "too close to the middle."
• The scar may be invisible.  However, a secondary procedure would necessitate inframammary or periareolar scars.
• This technique is officially condemned by implant manufacturers.  Use of the TUBA approach invalidates device warranties.

Bottom lines: 

• Like my colleagues around the country, I advocate incisions at the inframammary folds and around the areolae.
• For most patients, the fold will be best, especially since silicone is becoming so much more popular than saline.
• In the unusual patient who either has constricted breasts or poorly defined folds, periareolar incisions may be better.