Body Contouring

Aesthetic Surgery Journal

The Ideal Thigh: A Crowdsourcing-Based 2017, 1–9

© 2018 The American Society for
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc.
Assessment of Ideal Thigh Aesthetic and Reprints and permission:
journals.permissions@oup.com

Implications for Gluteal Fat Grafting DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjx191

www.aestheticsurgeryjournal.com

Emma Vartanian, MD; Daniel J. Gould, MD, PhD;

Ziyad S. Hammoudeh, MD; Beina Azadgoli, MS;
W. Grant Stevens, MD, FACS; and Luis H. Macias, MD, FACS

Abstract
Background:  As the popularity of aesthetic gluteoplasty continues to grow, there is renewed focus on defining the ideal buttocks. However, the
literature lacks studies characterizing an ideal thigh, despite the impact of thigh contour on overall gluteal aesthetic.
Objectives:  The authors performed the first population analysis of the characteristics of perception of attractive thighs, to identify a role for fat grafting
of the thigh in gluteoplasty.
Methods:  Survey images were digitally modified to create thighs of varying widths and angles relative to fixed buttocks. Thigh-to-buttock ratios and
the buttock-thigh junction were studied. Data were stratified and analyzed according to age, gender, and ethnicity of the respondents. Amazon Mechanical
Turk was used as a novel crowdsourcing platform for surveying aesthetic preferences.
Results:  A total of 1034 responses were included of whom 54.4% were male, and 45.6% were female. All age groups and ethnicities were repre-
sented. Overall, 43.8% of respondents preferred the widest buttock-thick junction angle on posterior view. There was no clear preference between larger
or smaller thigh-to-hip ratios on lateral view.
Conclusions:  Characteristics of the ideal thigh include wider thighs with greater horizontal projection, creating a more natural contour from the aug-
mented buttock. These findings represent a paradigm shift from the traditionally assumed preference for slender thighs. Plastic surgeons should carefully
consider thigh anatomy in their gluteal augmentation patients, as simultaneous thigh augmentation may lead to a more aesthetically pleasing outcome.
Further research is needed into best practices and techniques to attain ideal thigh proportions.

Editorial Decision date: September 19, 2017.

The female buttocks has been a ubiquitous symbol of
femininity throughout history, and as modern trends shift
towards more dramatic curves, gluteal augmentation sur-
gery continues to grow in popularity. Over 20,000 buttock
augmentation procedures, with implants or fat transfer, were
performed in 2016, compared to less than 8000 performed
in 2011, a 180% increase in just five years.1,2 Since the first
successful augmentation in 1973 by Cocke and Ricketson,
using a round implant designed to have more projection
than a breast implant,3 there has been ongoing reinvention
of the ideal gluteal shape. Free fat grafting4 has become
prevalent in gluteal augmentation due to the success seen
in breast grafting,5-8 and though questions exist about tech-
nique and safety, the procedure is increasing in popular-
ity.9,10 Recently, the efforts of many surgeons in the arena
of fat grafting have contributed to a surge in the number
From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Keck School
of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Corresponding Author:
Dr Luis H. Macias, 4644 Lincoln Boulevard, Suite 552, Marina del Rey,
CA 90292, USA.
E-mail: lhmacias@gmail.com

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272

by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
 2
of patients undergoing lipogluteoplasty, and to the clinical
understanding of successful aesthetic outcomes.11-17
However, while many studies have looked at goals and
results in gluteal augmentation,18,19 there is no literature that
discusses the role of the thigh contour in overall buttock
aesthetic. Enhancing the butt and lateral hip, whether with
implants or lipoinjection, adds volume to the buttocks without
altering the base of the thigh, producing what some cosmetic
surgeons colloquially refer to as “the lollipop deformity” or
“marshmallow on a stick.” The result is a disproportionate
figure that is viewed as unattractive, and thereby counterpro-
ductive to patients’ desires. We hypothesize a broader thigh
base would allow a more natural curvature and aesthetically
pleasing outcome after gluteal augmentation. Shaping such
a base would require augmenting the thigh as well, however
such an intervention is likely to be rejected in an era where
thigh liposuction and lifts are the status quo. We therefore
set out to objectively define characteristics of the ideal thigh.
Several authors have defined gluteal subunits and uni-
versal attractive features, such as a V-shaped gluteal crease
and the presence of lateral depressions.18 Mendieta divides
key buttock components into volume, shape, and skin lax-
ity.20,21 He further defines ten aesthetic units of the poste-
rior region, each with its own aesthetic needs and pitfalls.22
To date, no such analysis has been conducted on the thigh.
Wong et al in their recent publication updating standards
for the ideal buttock found that that the traditional 0.7
waist-to-hip ratio, anthropologically correlated with the
greatest fertility, had been replaced by new ideal ratios of
0.6 and 0.65.19,23 Building on this framework, we designed
a survey to quantify key ratios for the ideal thigh, while
keeping buttock features the same. Importantly, we dis-
tributed this survey through a novel crowdsourcing web-
site operated by Amazon, called Mechanical Turk. Amazon
Mechanical Turk is an internet service that provides an
on-demand human workface from around the globe,
allowing diverse and rapid feedback. This tool was previ-
ously validated in the plastic surgery literature by a study
using conjoint analysis with crowdsourcing to character-
ize the most important attributes of aesthetic surgeons.24
It has been applied in behavioral science and psychiatric
research,25,26 but our study is the first of its kind to apply
Mechanical Turk to cosmetic preferences.
The aim of this study was thus twofold. First, to high-
light the importance of thigh contour in overall buttock
aesthetic, and secondly, to illustrate the untapped potential
of Mechanical Turk to classify broad preferences and guide
aesthetic surgery decision making. To meet patients’ expec-
tations, a plastic surgeon must understand their requests
within the context of their personal identity, and given the
changing demographic makeup of the United States, popu-
lation surveys are an invaluable tool to reveal cultural ideals.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272
by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
Aesthetic Surgery Journal
METHODS
The authors developed a study survey by digitally alter-
ing images of thighs using Adobe Photoshop CC (Adobe
Systems, Inc., San Jose, CA) to create thighs of varying
proportions. Images were obtained from the operative pho-
tos of a 27-year-old female patient who signed an informed
consent allowing photographs to be used for research pur-
poses. Surveys were distributed electronically through a
new polling platform, Amazon Mechanical Turk, in which
anonymous users were offered $0.05 for their responses
during February to May 2017. Two thigh panels were pre-
sented and respondents were asked to rank each set of
images from most to least attractive. A blank copy of the
survey is available as Appendix A (available online as
Supplementary Material at www.aestheticsurgeryjournal.
com). Within each panel, images were arranged in a ran-
dom order to avoid bias. Randomization was performed by
the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap, Vanderbilt
University, Nashville, TN) software. Users also answered
demographic questions regarding age, gender, ethnicity,
and nationality, with age range divisions based on standard
demographic delineated categories. Institutional Review
Board approval was not required as none of the respond-
ents were patients; we conducted the survey in accordance
with the ethical standards set out by the Declaration of
Helsinki.
To capture the spatial relationship between thigh and
buttock contour in our figures, we specifically analyzed
the buttock-thigh junction. All proportions were measured
with the Adobe Photoshop CC ruler tool for confirmation
of accuracy. We defined a lateral buttock-thigh ratio as the
width of the thigh at the infragluteal crease over the width
the point of maximal projection of the buttocks, which
was set at a vertical level halfway between the infragluteal
crease and the iliac crest (Figure 1). This ratio varied from
0.5 to 0.9 in five adjacent images presented on one panel
(Figure 2). We then looked at the obtuse angle between an
anatomical vertical meridian from the ASIS to the inter-
trochanteric crest, transposed laterally in the diagram to
intersect the thigh-buttock convexity, and an oblique line
connecting the widest point of horizontal buttock projec-
tion to the superolateral thigh-buttock junction (Figure 1).
This “junction angle” allowed to us to adjust the severity
of transition from buttock to thigh while preserving the
overall shape of the thigh. The angle was set between 170
and 110 degrees in increments of 15 degrees between each
image. Given that the ideal waist-hip ratio (defined as the
width of the narrowest portion between the ribs and iliac
crest compared to the width of the widest point of the but-
tocks) had previously been found to be 0.65, we used this
value and kept the ratio uniform across all images.
 Vartanian et al 3

A B

Figure 1.  (A, B) Photographs of a 27-year-old female patient. Lateral thigh-to-buttock ratio represented by a/b, where a is
the horizontal distance across the buttock-thigh junction (at the level of the gluteal crease) and b is the horizontal distance to
the point of maximal buttock projection. Posterior view with thigh-buttock junction angle represented by angle θ, the angle
between an anatomical vertical meridian from the anterior superior illiac spine (ASIS) to trochanteric crest, transposed laterally
in the diagram to intersect the thigh-buttock convexity, and an oblique line from the widest point of buttock projection to the
thigh-buttock junction.

Figure 2.  Image panels used in the survey, prior to randomization and with numeric labels added for ease of description.
(A) Depiction of decreasing thigh-buttock junction angle in 15 degree increments, from an angle of 170 degrees in image 1 to
110 degrees in image 5. (B) Depiction of increasing thigh-to-buttock ratio, from a ratio of 0.5 to 0.9.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272

by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
 4 Aesthetic Surgery Journal

Data were stratified according to the age range, gender, Table 1.  Respondent Demographic Results
ethnicity, and nationality of the respondents. Statistical
Demographic characteristic No. of respondents (%)
analysis of the data was performed with Microsoft Excel
2016 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, Wash.), with values of Total no. of respondents 1034
P < 0.05 designating statistical significance. Gender

Male 562 (54.4)

RESULTS Female 472 (45.6)

A total of 1052 responses were collected. There were Age group (years)
18 respondents who did not complete the survey in its
18-24 92 (8.9)
entirety and whose responses were thus excluded from
data analysis. Of the total 1034 respondents included, 25-34 514 (49.7)
562 (54.4%) were male and 472 (45.6%) were female 35-44 263 (25.4)
(Table 1). Ages ranged from 18 to 72 years old, with a
mean age of 39. The most represented groups were the 45-54 90 (8.7)

25 to 34 year-old (49.7%) and 35 to 44 year-old (25.4%) 55-64 54 (5.2)

demographics. Most of our population was located
>65 21 (2)
in either the United States (44.6%) or Asia (41.7%),
however we received responses from every geographic Location of Origin
region.
Africa 19 (1.8)

Asia 431 (41.7)

Thigh Preferences Overall
Australia 2 (0.2)
From a population perspective, the most attractive pos-
Canada 12 (1.2)
terior thigh option was image 1 (43.8% of respondents),
with a thigh-buttock junction angle of 170 degrees and Caribbean/Pacific Islands 7 (0.7)
thus the widest thigh base. Chi-square fit analysis
Europe 62 (6.0)
determined there was a statistically significant skew in
responses (P < 0.05). We applied a binomial test to Mexico 3 (0.3)
compare preference for image 1 to the expected distri- Middle East 7 (0.7)
bution, and determined this outcome was significant
(P < 0.05). Image 2 was the second most attractive South America 30 (2.9)

(31.3%), image 3 was the third most (36.9%), and United States 461 (44.6)
image 4 was fourth most (36.9%). Image 5, with the
Ethnicity
sharpest thigh-buttock junction angle at 110 degrees
and the slimmest lateral thigh, was found to be the Black/African 50 (4.8)
least attractive (43.9%). Each of these ratings was sta-
Chinese 21 (2.0)
tistically significant (P < 0.05), supporting a direct
decrease in attractiveness as posterior thigh width grew Hispanic/Latino 42 (4.1)

narrower. Indian subcontinent 365 (35.3)

From the lateral view, there was a broad distribution
Japanese 3 (0.3)
of preferences among groups. The preferred thigh-buttock
ratio was 0.8, with 27.6% of respondents rating this as Korean 5 (0.5)
the most attractive image. The second-most attractive ratio
Middle Eastern 23 (2.2)
was 0.6 (26.9%), then 0.5 (27.6%) and 0.6 (27.4%) as
third- and fourth-most attractive, respectively. The least Native American 20 (1.9)
attractive thigh was image 5 (43.6%) with a thigh-but- Pacific Islander 29 (2.8)
tock ratio at 0.9, the widest displayed. These preferences
were nonsignificant, except for the finding that image 5 White/Caucasian 439 (42.5)

was least attractive (P < 0.05). These results are tabulated Other/multiracial 37 (3.6)
in Table 2. Given the subtle shift in thigh shape between
images on the lateral panel, we performed a subanaly-
sis dividing responses into three groups, to determine if ratios as most attractive were compared, and respondents
broader themes in preferences were present. Choice of demonstrated no significant predilection towards any cat-
narrow (0.5-0.6), medium (0.7), and wide (0.8-0.9) thigh egory (P > 0.05).

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272

by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
 Vartanian et al 5

Table 2.  Thigh Aesthetic Preferences

Most attractive (percent- Second-most attractive Third-most attractive (per- Fourth-most attractive (per- Least attractive (percent-
age of respondents) (percentage of respondents) centage of respondents) centage of respondents) age of respondents)

Posterior image 1 (43.8) 2 (31.3) 3 (31.4) 4 (36.9) 5 (43.9)

  Thigh-buttock 170° 155° 140° 125° 110°

junction angle

Lateral image 4 (27.6) 3 (26.9) 1 (27.6) 2 (27.4) 5 (43.6)

  Thigh-hip ratio 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.9

Thigh Preferences Categorized by Age Table 3.  Most Attractive Thigh by Age Ranges
Ranges of Respondents Age range Posterior view image (% of Lateral view image (% of
(years) respondents) respondents)
When ratings were categorized by age demographics, all
18-24 1 (37.0) 1 (27.2)
groups except those 65 years or older chose image 1 as
the most attractive posterior view (P < 0.05). The num- 25-34 1 (40.0) 4 (26.3)
bers of respondents who were aged 65 years or older were
35-44 1 (52.1) 4 (30.8)
few (21 in total) in comparison with those of other groups
studied, making it difficult to draw any conclusions regard- 45-54 1 (51.1) 3 (26.7)
ing buttock preferences in this age range. Preferences on 55-64 1 (28.1) 3 (36.6)
lateral view were mixed, however respondents aged 25 to
>65 2 (28.6) 4 (23.8)
34, 35 to 44, and 65 or older rated a thigh-hip ratio of 0.8
as the most attractive (Table 3). These findings were not
significant.
We next analyzed the data by stratifying posterior view Thigh Preference by Location
ratings by both age and gender, to see if males and females
within each group demonstrated varying preferences. For Given the wide distribution of locations of origin, we
ages 25 to 34, 35 to 44, and 45 to 54, both males and looked at responses from the four most represented
females rated image 1 as the most attractive (Figure 3). regions—United States, Asia, Europe, and South America
In the 18 to 24 demographic, females found image 1 most (Table 5). Respondents from all areas listed posterior
attractive (49.7%), whereas males found image 2 most image 1 as the most attractive, with over half of surveyed
attractive (32.1%). Similarly, for those aged 55 to 64, the Europeans and South Americans preferring this widest
preferred thigh for females was image 1 (60.4%), and for thigh (P < 0.05). Lateral view responses were evenly dis-
males was image 2 (29.3%). tributed. Respondents from the United States, Asia, and
South America selected image 4 as the most attractive by
slim margins, whereas those from Europe preferred image
Thigh Preference by Ethnicity 3. These findings were nonsignificant (P > 0.05). A small
minority of respondents resided in areas not mentioned
When evaluating aesthetic appeal from the posterior
above, thus preferences were not evaluated according to
thigh view, all ethnicities were unanimous in preferring
every possible location.
image 1, except those who identified as Middle Eastern
(Table 4). Of these 23 respondents, 34.8% found image 3
to be the most attractive (P > 0.05). Responses for lateral Characteristics of Respondents
view preferences were again broadly distributed. Those
Categorized by Lateral Thigh Preference
of Chinese, Indian, Middle Eastern, and Caucasian des-
cent selected a thigh-buttock ratio of 0.8 as most attract- Lastly, to confirm the seemingly even distribution of lateral
ive, whereas Black, Hispanic, and multi-racial ethnicities thigh preferences, we analyzed demographic characteris-
preferred a ratio of 0.6. Native Americans and Pacific tics of the respondents who had picked each of the five
Islanders leaned toward a ratio of 0.6, and only Koreans lateral thighs as the most attractive (Supplemental Table 1,
chose 0.9 as the most attractive proportion. Small sample available online as Supplementary Material at www.aes-
sizes made it challenging to draw statistically significant theticsurgeryjournal.com). Among those who preferred
conclusions. image 2, there were a larger number of females than males

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272

by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
 6 Aesthetic Surgery Journal

A B

C D

E F

Figure 3.  Choice for most attractive thigh from posterior view categorized by gender and age of respondents. Percentages of
female respondents are shown in blue and those of male respondents are shown in orange. (A) Preferences of respondents
aged 18 to 24 years. (B) Preferences of respondents aged 25 to 34 years. (C) Preferences of respondents aged 35 to 44 years.
(D) Preferences of respondents aged 45 to 54 years. (E) Preferences of respondents aged 54 to 65 years. (F) Preferences of
respondents over aged 65 years.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272

by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
 Vartanian et al
Table 4.  Preferences for Most Attractive Thigh by Ethnicity
Black/ Chinese Hispanic/
African Latino sub-conti-
Posterior 1 (50.0) 1 (38.1) 1 (52.3)
image
Lateral 3 (32.0) 4 (33.3) 3 (33.3)
image
Table 5.  Most Attractive Thigh by Location of Origin
Location of origin Posterior view image Lateral view image
(% of respondents) (% of respondents)
United States 1 (47.3)
Asia 1 (35.7)
Europe 1 (67.7)
South America 1 (60.0)
(P < 0.05). Conversely, significantly more males were rep-
resented in the group that preferred image 5, depicting the
widest lateral thigh. Groups who selected the other images
did not have significant differences in gender. Age distribu-
tion was similar between groups, with 25 to 34 year olds
comprising the majority of respondents for each image,
followed by 35 to 44 year olds. Respondents who identi-
fied as Caucasian or Indian made up the majority for all
groups. No differences in ethnic make up between those
who selected each image reached significance.
DISCUSSION
This study aimed to define the general population’s pref-
erence for ideal thigh shape. As the popularity and preva-
lence of gluteal augmentation has grown in recent years,
interest in buttock aesthetic has increased accordingly.
Mendieta and others have described detailed classification
systems for buttock features and landmarks to guide surgi-
cal approach to gluteoplasty.20 However, the thigh, which
in its immediate proximity to the buttocks plays a key
role in posterior region appearance, has been neglected
by researchers and surgeons alike. By surveying diverse
individuals through an anonymous internet survey, pow-
ered by Amazon Mechanical Turk, we sought to establish
population-based guidelines for the ideal thigh. Our study
found that a wider lateral thigh width, as measured by the
buttock-thigh junction angle, was preferred in comparison
with a slimmer thigh. Almost half of respondents chose
the widest displayed thigh as the most attractive, and
this preference was similar across ages, ethnicities, and
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272
by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
7
% of respondents
Indian Japanese Korean Middle Native Other/ Pacific White/
East American Multi- Islander Caucasian
nent racial
1 (35.6) 1 (66.7) 1 (100) 3 (34.8) 1 (35.0) 1 (48.6) 1 (27.8) 1 (50.3)
4 (25.8) 4 (100) 5 (60.0) 4 (34.8) 2 (35.0) 3 (27.0) 2 (41.4) 4 (29.2)
countries. Notably, as the lateral thigh narrowed, respond-
ents tended to rate it as increasingly less attractive, demon-
strating the consistency of this preference. Image five, with
the narrowest thigh, was overwhelmingly rated as the least
4 (27.8) attractive image, by 43.9% of respondents. This supports
4 (25.5) the conclusion that it was relative thigh width, rather than
any other feature, that guided ratings. Males and females
3 (33.9)
voted similarly, refuting the widespread notion that men
4 (33.3) prefer slimmer frames. In fact, significantly more men pre-
ferred the thicker thigh on lateral view compared to female
respondents.
When approaching the thigh from a lateral view, there
was no clear consensus on ideal width. Thigh-buttock ratios
from 0.5 to 0.8 were found to be similarly attractive, and
there were no notable differences in the demographic make
up of populations selecting each image. However, a ratio of
0.9 was found to be least attractive by a statistically signif-
icant margin. Our results suggest that additional breadth is
more appreciated in the coronal plane of the thigh than in
the sagittal plane. Extending thigh width to the extreme on
side view produced a displeasing result, whereas a spectrum
of thinner thighs was equally acceptable. These findings are
consistent with the modern predilection for a curvy, fem-
inine figure. Augmenting the lateral aspects of the thighs,
adjacent to the gluteal crease, creates a smoother transi-
tion from buttock to leg and avoids unnatural mismatch.
Conversely, on lateral view, respondents chose to preserve
buttock projection by limiting relative thigh extension. This
makes intuitive sense as the aim of gluteoplasty is often to
enhance and distinctly define the buttock.
This study points to the need for a major paradigm shift
in the field of gluteoplasty. While many women would balk
at the idea of thigh augmentation, and surgeons would be
unlikely to suggest it, our data indicate most individuals
feel a wide upper thigh is more attractive. The goal of cos-
metic surgeons is to increase buttock depth and projec-
tion, simulating an hourglass shape. Yet if the soft tissue is
augmented in these dimensions, whether with implants or
with fat grafting, and the thigh is left unchanged, the result
is disproportionate and displeasing. Gluteal augmentation
procedures should therefore address thigh contour with
as much care as they do buttock shape. Previous studies
 8
have concluded that the most attractive waist-to-hip ratio
in the modern era is closer to 0.65 than the traditional 0.7,
reflecting preference for a more dramatic appearance of a
small waist and voluptuous buttocks.27 Our study builds
on this finding to demonstrate that a curvier buttock is
best complemented by a broader based thigh.
Our data also demonstrates the utility and potential of
Amazon Mechanical Turk for determining population pref-
erences. This platform allowed our survey to be distributed
to a heterogenous group of individuals across the globe.
Plastic surgeons continually debate questions of ideal aes-
thetic; however, Turk offers a window into real-time beauty
standards. Knowing what a specific ethnic population finds
attractive, or what females of a certain age are looking for,
will allow the surgeon to adjust his techniques to provide
patients with well-received outcomes. Mechanical Turk has
already been successfully applied to behavioral science, psy-
chology research, and consumer data mining. This study
represents the one of the first incorporations of this tool
into aesthetic surgery research, a field with highly relevant
applications.
This study had several limitations. It was a largely
two-ethnicity study, and findings were limited by the
skewed number of Caucasians and Southeast Indians in
comparison with other ethnic groups. Consequently, we
were unable to meaningfully comment on preferences of
other populations prevalent among aesthetic patients,
Asians, Latinos, or African Americans. We anticipate
results more tailored to each culture in future studies, with
a more even number of respondents from each location and
ethnic group. There were morphometric limitations, as our
digitally altered images oversimplify the thigh-buttock rela-
tionship and do not account for changes in leg dimensions.
We designed the study in this manner to isolate single vari-
ables, despite the small risk of nonanatomical depictions.
Furthermore, since the widest displayed thigh on posterior
view was found to be the most attractive, and there was
no comparison to an even wider thigh, we are unable to
determine whether our maximal width is truly the ideal
and whether further increases would be less favorable.
Another consequence of isolating thigh measurements
is that a wider thigh-buttock ratio could alternately be
interpreted as favoring a narrower buttock rather than
an augmented thigh. Certainly the relationship between
anatomical parts is a key take-away, but the aim of our
study was to highlight the specific role of thigh dimen-
sion. By keeping the buttocks neutral and constant across
our images, the salience and therefore impact of a wide or
narrow buttock was minimized. In practice, an integrated
approach to buttock and thigh shaped is necessary for
individualized patient planning.
Finally, due to the survey-based nature of our study,
our results are dependent on the honesty of our respon-
dents in answering demographic questions. The 18
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272
by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
Aesthetic Surgery Journal
individuals who did not complete the survey in its entirety
were excluded, to mitigate the effect of inaccurate infor-
mation. Through Mechanical Turk, each user was required
to submit a unique worker identification code to receive
payment upon survey completion, and codes were not
allowed to be repeated. This ensured that each response
was a novel data point, rather than a reiteration of a pre-
vious respondent.
CONCLUSIONS
The goal of gluteoplasty procedures is to make the poste-
rior region more pleasing to the patient. The thigh plays
a major role in final appearance, yet there are no guide-
lines for thigh aesthetic. As various authors have repeat-
edly discussed, in order to evaluate the success of surgery
there must be an ideal, or “yardstick,” against which to
compare results.28 Quantification of ideal relationships
not only provides a more accurate understanding of anat-
omy, but serves to guide surgical techniques towards opti-
mal aesthetic outcomes.29 In seeking to elucidate modern
preferences, this study highlights the importance of thigh
contour in creating an attractive result. A broad upper
thigh, with seamless transition from buttock to thigh,
was found to be most attractive shape. This finding has
important implications for simultaneous thigh augmenta-
tion during gluteoplasty. Crowdsourcing, with the aid of
modern photography and software, is thus a powerful tool
to define aesthetic goals by turning patients into engaged
consultants.
Supplementary Material
This article contains supplementary material located online at
www.aestheticsurgeryjournal.com.
Disclosures
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and publication of this
article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and publication of this article.
REFERENCES
1. Cosmetic Surgery National Data Bank Statistics. Aesthet
Surg J. 2017;37(suppl_2):1-29.
2. American Society for Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2011 Cosmetic
Surgery National Data Bank Statistics. Available at:
https://www.surgery.org/sites/default/files/ASAPS-
Stats2011.pdf. Accessed September 10, 2017.
3. Mofid MM, Gonzalez R, de la Peña JA, Mendieta CG,
Senderoff DM, Jorjani S. Buttock augmentation with
 Vartanian et al
silicone implants: a multicenter survey review of 2226
patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131(4):897-901.
4. Peer LA. The neglected free fat graft. Plast Reconstr Surg.
1956;18(4):233-250.
5. Khouri RK, Eisenmann-Klein M, Cardoso E, et al. Brava
and autologous fat transfer is a safe and effective breast
augmentation alternative: results of a 6-year, 81-patient,
prospective multicenter study. Plast Reconstr Surg.
2012;129(5):1173-1187.
6. Coleman SR, Saboeiro AP. Fat grafting to the breast
revisited: safety and efficacy. Plast Reconstr Surg.
2007;119(3):775-785.
7. Clauser L, Polito J, Mandrioli S, Tieghi R, Denes SA, Galiè
M. Structural fat grafting in complex reconstructive sur-
gery. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19(1):187-191.
8. Coleman SR. Structural fat grafting: more than a permanent
filler. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118(3 Suppl):108S-120S.
9. Del Vecchio D, Rohrich RJ. A classification of clinical
fat grafting: different problems, different solutions. Plast
Reconstr Surg. 2012;130(3):511-522.
10. Cárdenas-Camarena L, Arenas-Quintana R, Robles-
Cervantes JA. Buttocks fat grafting: 14 years of evolution
and experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(2):545-555.
11. Toledo LS. Gluteal augmentation with fat grafting: the
Brazilian buttock technique: 30 years’ experience. Clin
Plast Surg. 2015;42(2):253-261.
12. Roberts TL III, Weinfeld AB, Bruner TW, Nguyen K.
“Universal” and ethnic ideals of beautiful buttocks are
best obtained by autologous micro fat grafting and lipo-
suction. Clin Plast Surg. 2006;33(3):371-394.
13. Perén PA, Gómez JB, Guerrerosantos J, Salazar CA.
Gluteus augmentation with fat grafting. Aesthetic Plast
Surg. 2000;24(6):412-417.
14. Pereira LH, Radwanski HN. Fat grafting of the buttocks
and lower limbs. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2004;20(5):409-416.
15. Pedroza D, Valero L. Fat Transplantation to the Buttocks
and Legs for Aesthetic Enhancement or Correction of
Deformities: Long‐Term Results of Large Volumes of Fat
Transplant. Dermatol Surg. 2000;26(12):1145-1149.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/asj/sjx191/4818272
by Mount Royal College user
on 23 January 2018
9
16. Murillo WL. Buttock augmentation: case studies of fat
injection monitored by magnetic resonance imaging. Plast
Reconstr Surg. 2004;114(6):1606-1614.
17. Gutowski KA, Force AFGT. Current applications and safety
of autologous fat grafts: a report of the ASPS fat graft task
force. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124(1):272-280.
18. Cuenca-Guerra R, Lugo-Beltran I. Beautiful buttocks:
characteristics and surgical techniques. Clin Plast Surg.
2006;33(3):321-332.
19. Wong WW, Motakef S, Lin Y, Gupta SC. Redefining the
Ideal Buttocks: A Population Analysis. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2016;137(6):1739-1747.
20. Mendieta CG. Classification system for gluteal evaluation.
Clin Plast Surg. 2006;33(3):333-346.
21. Mendieta CG. Gluteoplasty. Aesthet Surg J.
2003;23(6):441-455.
22. Mendieta CG. Gluteal reshaping. Aesthet Surg J.
2007;27(6):641-655.
23. Singh D. Adaptive significance of female physical attract-
iveness: role of waist-to-hip ratio. J Pers Soc Psychol.
1993;65(2):293-307.
24. Wu C, Scott HC, Diegidio P. What do our patients truly want?
Conjoint analysis of an Aesthetic Plast Surg practice using
internet crowdsourcing. Aesthet Surg J. 2017;37(1):105-118.
25. Bates JA, Lanza BA. Conducting psychology student
research via the Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing service.
N Am J Psychol. 2013;15(2):385.
26. Crump MJ, McDonnell JV, Gureckis TM. Evaluating
Amazon’s Mechanical Turk as a tool for experimental
behavioral research. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e57410.
27. Freese J, Meland S. Seven tenths incorrect: heterogeneity
and change in the waist-to-hip ratios of Playboy center-
fold models and Miss America pageant winners. J Sex Res.
2002;39(2):133-138.
28. Millard DR Jr. Principlization of Plastic Surgery. Boston:
Little, Brown; 1986.
29. Aly A, Tolazzi A, Soliman S, Cram A. Quantitative ana-
lysis of aesthetic results: introducing a new paradigm.
Aesthet Surg J. 2012;32(1):120-124.