5 Safety

5 Safety

This section describes safety outcomes from the published literature that the committee considered as part of the evidence about this procedure. For more detailed information on the evidence, see the interventional procedure overview.

5.1 Blood transfusion was reported in 6% (2/33) of patients in the group treated with a tourniquet, in 37% (7/19) of patients in the group not treated with a tourniquet or adrenaline and in none of the patients in the group treated with a tourniquet and adrenaline, in a case series of 80 patients treated by liposuction for chronic lymphoedema. Blood transfusion was reported in 13% (2/15) of patients treated by liposuction in a case series of 15 patients (12 women, 3 men).

5.2 Localised skin loss and healing by second intention was reported in 13% (2/15) of patients in the case series of 15 patients (12 woman, 3 men) treated by liposuction. Wound infection needing surgical debridement was reported in 1 patient in the same case series. Marginal wound necrosis was reported in 1 patient in another case series of 15 patients (14 women, 1 man) with chronic lymphoedema treated by liposuction.

5.3 Cellulitis was reported in 1 patient in the other case series of 15 patients (14 women, 1 man) treated by liposuction.

5.4 Hypaesthesia was reported in 1 patient in the case series of 15 patients (14 women, 1 man) treated by liposuction.

5.5 Decubitus ulcer due to compression therapy was reported in 1 patient with primary lymphoedema in a case series of 88 patients treated by liposuction.

5.6 In addition to safety outcomes reported in the literature, specialist advisers are asked about anecdotal adverse events (events which they have heard about) and about theoretical adverse events (events which they think might possibly occur, even if they have never done so). For this procedure, specialist advisers listed no anecdotal events. They considered that pain was a theoretical adverse events.

  • National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)