TerKonda, Sarvam

Background/Objectives: Immortality and anti-aging research is accelerating, with implications across medicine. This narrative review explores the biological principles, translational innovations, and ethical considerations at the intersection of aging and plastic surgery, reframed for a broad clinical audience. Methods: A narrative review of the literature from PubMed, clinical trials, and translational studies was conducted, with emphasis on regenerative medicine, stem cells, tissue engineering, gene editing, and longevity pharmacologics within the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery. Results: Key themes include (1) the biology of aging and epigenetic reprogramming, (2) esthetic and regenerative innovations with broader clinical significance, (3) emerging genetic and pharmacologic longevity strategies, (4) ethical and regulatory challenges, and (5) future directions such as nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, and digital immortality. Conclusions: Immortality remains an aspirational frontier, but innovations in regenerative science and longevity research offer opportunities for improving healthspans. Medicine as a whole must balance innovation with ethics, equity, and safety in translating these discoveries to patient care.

Background: In this systematic review, we assessed the therapeutic efficacy and safety of Clostridium histolyticum collagenase (CCH) and tissue subcision (TS) for treating cellulite, which ranges from subtle to pronounced lesions. Methods: A systematic review was performed following PRISMA guidelines for CCH and TS treatment to the thigh and gluteal regions. A proportion meta-analysis was then conducted using Stata statistical software. Results: A total of 14 studies were incorporated into the final analysis. Nine focused on TS and five on CCH injection, collectively reporting outcomes for 1254 patients. Of these, 465 received CCH injection and 789 underwent subcision. For bruising, rates were 89% [95% confidence interval (CI), 71%–96%] with CCH injection and 99% (95% CI, 85%–99%) for subcision; pain requiring analgesic was reported at 74% (95% CI, 55%–87%) for CCH and 60% (95% CI, 43%–76%) for subcision; both showed induration at 7% (95% CI, 5%–11% for CCH, 95% CI, 2%–25% for subcision), whereas skin discoloration was higher post-CCH injection at 16% (95% CI, 10%–26%) compared with 7% (95% CI, 5%–10%) postsubcision. Conclusions: Both CCH and TS seem effective treatments for cellulite. However, upon evaluating the adverse outcomes between the two modalities, subcision demonstrated a higher incidence of bruising, albeit similar rates of induration compared with CCH injection. Conversely, the CCH injection group manifested a higher propensity for pain requiring analgesia and notably exhibited increased instances of skin discoloration compared with their subcision patient group. Further standardized research is crucial for more informed cellulite treatment decisions and for comparing efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness between TS and CCH.

Background: Latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap (LDMF) with tissue expander provides excellent results in breast reconstruction. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been used in expander-based reconstruction (EBR) with good results. This study assesses how ADM compares to LDMF in EBR. Methods: The cohorts comprised 124 patients (218 breasts) who had EBR using ADM between 2006 and 2012, and 242 patients (266 breasts) who had EBR using LDMF between 1994 and 2012. Postoperative complications, reoperations, Breast-Q scores, and objectively assessed aesthetic outcomes were compared. Results: Median age was 55 years for both ADM (range 23–84) and LDMF (range 26–88) groups. No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups in the rates of major postoperative complications (P > 0.3). Forty-nine of the 218 (22.5%) in the ADM group and 67 of 266 (25.2%) in the LDMF group had a total of 63 and 84 reoperations, respectively (P = 0.52), with no significant differences in the reoperations rate (P > 0.3). No significant differences were observed in the Breast-Q scores. Some categorical differences were noted in the aesthetic outcomes; however, the difference between the overall outcomes was not significant (P = 0.54). Conclusion: Our study revealed no statistically significant differences in the complications or reoperation rates, patient satisfaction, or overall aesthetic outcomes when comparing the use of ADM to LDMF in EBR. In conclusion, this study supports the hypothesis that ADM performs as well as LDMF in EBR.