103 PSTM 2018 Abstract Supplement Sunday, September 30, 2018 by micro-CT analysis of 10 randomly selected mice. Vas- culature entering the matrix was observed macroscopi- cally at both 2 weeks and 8 weeks. Electron microscopy demonstrated cellular infltration into the matrix as well as encapsulation of the material. Immunohistochemistry showed infltration of fbroblast cells as well as increased vascularization in the matrix without evidence of immuno- genic cell infltration of T cells or macrophages. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates the potential to use Integra Flowable Matrix as a soft tissue fller for recon- structive patients or aesthetic patients requiring soft tissue volume. Volume retention over time was comparable to current soft tissue fllers on the market, and higher than autologous fat grafting. Electron microscopy and immu- nohistochemistry data demonstrate vascularization of the matrix and infltration of fbroblasts and mesenchymal stem cells. Future research combining Flowable Matrix with autologous stem cells and adipose cells may also be promising. Meta-Analyses in Plastic Surgery: Can We Trust Their Results? Presenter: Connor McGuire, MHSc Co-Authors: Osama A. Samargandi, MD; Joseph P. Corkum, MD; Helene Retrouvey, MDCM; Michael Bezuhly, MD, MSc, FRCSC Affiliation: Dalhousie Medical School, Halifax, NS PURPOSE: The objectives of this manuscript is to assess the overall quality of meta-analyses in plastic surgery from 2007–2017, assess whether there has been an improvement in quality over time, and evaluate variables that may be associated with scientifc quality. METHODS: A systematic review of meta-analyses was undertaken using a computerized search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews. Arti- cles from seven plastic surgery journals published between the years 2007 to 2017 were included. Publication descrip- tors (author, year, country of publication), methodological and statistical methods were extracted. Each article was then assessed using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Sys- tematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument. RESULTS: A total of 67 studies were included. The num- ber of meta-analyses increased consistently between 2007 and 2017 with the majority of studies coming from the United States. Most studies were outcome based, assessing a single intervention, from the journal Plastic & Reconstructive Sur- gery, pooled a mean of 21 primary studies (range: 2–134), and utilized a mean of 2465 patients (range: 44-14884). Most meta-analyses analyzed primary studies in the middle tiers of evidence levels (II to IV), with a small percentage analyzing randomized controlled trials (16.4%). Random effect modeling was most commonly used (47.8%) and meta-analyses gener- ally had positive (82.1%) and signifcant results (74.6%). Meta- analyses evaluated clinical (80.6%), methodological (65.6%), and statistical heterogeneity (50.7%) variably in terms of appropriateness and a substantial portion did not acknowledge or report methodological (7.5%) and statistical heterogeneity (25.4%). AMSTAR scores ranged between two and ten, with a mean of 6.7 out of 11. AMSTAR scores were correlated with year of publication (p=0.04, R=0.25). Multivariable linear anal- ysis indicated that more recent studies, studies that included a rationale for statistical pooling, and studies that properly man- aged methodological heterogeneity were correlated with higher AMSTAR scores (r=0.66, p<0.01). CONCLUSION: The quality and number of meta-analyses have increased; however, despite an improvement in qual- ity, the overall quality of most meta-analyses remains low. Meta-analyses should utilize proper data pooling methods and account for clinical heterogeneity appropriately. Read- ers, authors, reviewers, and journal editors should utilize validated instruments to evaluate meta-analysis to uphold methodological integrity. AESTHETIC SESSION 3 Post-Operative Intravenous Iron Sucrose Versus Post-Operative Oral Iron to Treat Post-Bariatric Abdominoplasty Anaemia (ISAPA): A Prospective, Open-Label, Randomised Controlled Trial Presenter: Juan Carlos Montano- Pedroso, MD, PhD Co-Authors: Elvio Bueno Garcia, MD, PhD; Mariana Alcantara Rodrigues de Moraes, MD; Daniela Francescato Veiga, PhD; Lydia Masako Ferreira, PhD