Literature DB >> 22535137

Three-dimensional evaluation of breast augmentation and the influence of anatomic and round implants on operative breast shape changes.

Laszlo Kovacs1, Maximilian Eder, Alexander Zimmermann, Daniel Müller, Tibor Schuster, Nikolaos A Papadopulos, Edgar Biemer, Markus Klöppel, Hans-Günther Machens.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Currently, postoperative outcome analysis in breast augmentation is essentially subjective, and objective evaluation of treatment efficacy is lacking. This study evaluates the influence of anatomic and round implant parameters on breast contour changes after subpectoral breast augmentation using three-dimensional (3D) surface imaging.
METHODS: 3D surface breast scans of 17 patients (34 breasts) undergoing subpectoral breast augmentation with round implants and of ten patients (20 breasts) receiving anatomic implants via an axillary approach under endoscopic assistance or a submammary fold incision were obtained before and 6 months postoperatively. 3D linear distance, breast volume, and surface measurement were correlated with the implanted round and anatomic implant parameters, and the resulting breast shape changes were evaluated.
RESULTS: Total breast volume changed in correlation with the implant size (2.4% difference; r=0.894; p<0.001). Implant volume and type influence the nipple-to-inframammary fold distance (N-IMF). Every inserted 100 ml implant volume enlarges the N-IMF distance by 0.8 cm (anatomic>round; p=0.01). Postoperatively, the IMF dropped by an average of 1.3 cm for round implants and by 1.1 cm for anatomic implants, without relevant differences between the applied surgical incision and the selected implants (p>0.05). Breast projection increased significantly more with anatomic implants (2.4 cm) than with round implants (1.7 cm) (p=0.01). The breast projection increase was 22% less than expected for round implants and 25% less than expected for anatomic implants based on the manufacturer implant parameters (p<0.01), without essential differences regarding the surgical incision.
CONCLUSIONS: 3D breast shape changes induced by round and anatomic implants after subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty are objectively documented including breast projection, volume, and N-IMF distance changes. 3D surface imaging may have a potential clinical contribution to objective surgical outcome research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors at www.springer.com/00266.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22535137     DOI: 10.1007/s00266-012-9892-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg        ISSN: 0364-216X            Impact factor:   2.326


  12 in total

1.  Three-dimensional prediction of free-flap volume in autologous breast reconstruction by CT angiography imaging.

Authors:  Maximilian Eder; Stefan Raith; Jalil Jalali; Daniel Müller; Yves Harder; Martin Dobritz; Nikolaos A Papadopulos; Hans-Günther Machens; Laszlo Kovacs
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2013-10-05       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Contralateral breast volume measurement during chest CT for postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Noha Mohamed Osman; Samer Malak Botros; Ahmed Fathy Abdel Ghany; Ashraf Maher Farid
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 2.924

Review 3.  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

4.  Optimal intraoperative selection of the projection of silicone breast implant using simplified cotton sizers.

Authors:  Naohiro Ishii; Yumiko Tani; Tomoki Kiuchi; Takahiro Uno; Jiro Ando; Kazuo Kishi
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-10

5.  A prospective study of breast dynamic morphological changes after dual-plane augmentation mammaplasty with 3D scanning technique.

Authors:  Kai Ji; Jie Luan; Chunjun Liu; Dali Mu; Lanhua Mu; Minqiang Xin; Jingjing Sun; Shilu Yin; Lin Chen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Predictability of anthropomorphic measurements in implant selection for breast reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Egidio Riggio; Ilaria Ardoino; Caroline E Richardson; Elia Biganzoli
Journal:  Eur J Plast Surg       Date:  2017-01-03

7.  "Topographic Shift": a new digital approach to evaluating topographic changes of the female breast.

Authors:  Luisa Lotter; Vanessa Brébant; Andreas Eigenberger; Robin Hartmann; Karolina Mueller; Magnus Baringer; Lukas Prantl; Daniel Schiltz
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2020-10-20       Impact factor: 2.344

8.  Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth.

Authors:  Luisa Lotter; Isabel Zucal; Vanessa Brébant; Norbert Heine; Robin Hartmann; Karolina Mueller; Lukas Prantl; Daniel Schiltz
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-12-28       Impact factor: 4.241

9.  Development of a Three-Dimensional Hand Model Using Three-Dimensional Stereophotogrammetry: Assessment of Image Reproducibility.

Authors:  Inge A Hoevenaren; J Meulstee; E Krikken; S J Bergé; D J O Ulrich; Thomas J J Maal
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A Simple and Practical Method for Setting Up a Criterion of Projection of Silicone Breast Implant After Simple Mastectomy.

Authors:  Naohiro Ishii; Jiro Ando; Michiko Harao; Masaru Takemae; Kazuo Kishi
Journal:  Eplasty       Date:  2017-08-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.