Literature DB >> 21632915

Incidence of breast and chest wall asymmetries: 4D photography.

Allen Gabriel1, Sharon Fritzsche, Craig Creasman, Waheed Baqai, David Mordaunt, G Patrick Maxwell.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few authors have addressed preoperative soft tissue and chest wall analysis as it pertains to asymmetries that must be identified for preoperative breast augmentation planning.
OBJECTIVES: The authors evaluate the incidence of breast and chest wall asymmetries.
METHODS: In the present study, 125 consecutive patients underwent a voluntary dimensional analysis by a single practitioner, followed by a confirmatory 4D photographic analysis. During each patient's evaluation, the following measurements were recorded: distance from nipple to inframammary fold (IMF), base width, distance from sternal notch to nipple, horizontal areolar width, vertical areolar height, upper and lower pole pinch tests, and medial and lateral pinch tests.
RESULTS: Following exclusion of patients who had undergone prior breast surgery, 117 patients were included in the final statistical analysis. Significant differences between right and left breasts were found in 81.7% of patients in one or more of the measured dimensions (p < .05). The manual measurements were confirmed with computerized 4D photography, and there was no significant difference found between the two measurement types in any objective parameter. However, there was a significant difference in the level of chest wall asymmetries identified by 4D photography. Nipple-to-IMF position asymmetry was present in 59.6% of the patients, and sternal notch-to-nipple asymmetry was present in 81.2%. Overall, 100% of the women had some degree of asymmetry (soft tissue and/or chest wall) confirmed by 4D photography.
CONCLUSIONS: The 4D photography measurements in this study were consistent with objective manual measurements but provided the added benefit of identifying chest wall asymmetries more objectively. The data from this study underscore the importance of developing a systematic preoperative breast and chest wall analysis that can be individualized for each patient. The resulting asymmetries should then be discussed with the patient, along with the potential for continued or more pronounced asymmetry postoperatively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21632915     DOI: 10.1177/1090820X11410868

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aesthet Surg J        ISSN: 1090-820X            Impact factor:   4.283


  6 in total

1.  Commentary on: Challenging Breast Augmentations: The Influence of Preoperative Anatomical Features on the Final Result.

Authors:  George J Zambacos
Journal:  Aesthet Surg J       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 4.283

Review 2.  Breast volumetric analysis for aesthetic planning in breast reconstruction: a literature review of techniques.

Authors:  Michael P Chae; Warren Matthew Rozen; Robert T Spychal; David J Hunter-Smith
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2016-04

3.  Social Media as a Tool to Educate Plastic Surgeons on Patients' Concerns Before and After Cosmetic Breast Surgeries.

Authors:  Nir Shaul; Eran Hadad; Andre Ofek; Lior Heller
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 2.326

4.  Can Breast Asymmetry Following the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Scoliosis with Growing Rod Be Prevented? : A Preliminary Analysis.

Authors:  Yunus Atici; Barış Polat; Sinan Erdogan; Tahsin Gürpınar; Serdar Demiröz
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2020-02-07

5.  A Novel Method of Outcome Assessment in Breast Reconstruction Surgery: Comparison of Autologous and Alloplastic Techniques Using Three-Dimensional Surface Imaging.

Authors:  Robin Hartmann; Maximilian Weiherer; Daniel Schiltz; Stephan Seitz; Luisa Lotter; Alexandra Anker; Christoph Palm; Lukas Prantl; Vanessa Brébant
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 2.326

6.  An ethics analysis of the rationale for publicly funded plastic surgery.

Authors:  Lars Sandman; Emma Hansson
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 2.652

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.