BACKGROUND: The transaxillary route is a popular method of breast augmentation because it is associated with inconspicuous scars. The subfascial plane carries the advantages and decreases the disadvantages of subglandular and submuscular planes. In the technique described, the authors placed the implant totally subfascially to strengthen the advantages of the traditional subfascial plane. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients (50 breasts) were included in the study from 2009 to 2012. The mean patient age was 27.3 years (range, 19 to 32 years). An axillary incision was performed and the pectoralis major fascia was opened initially. With endoscopic assistance, the dissection continued craniocaudally underneath the fasciae of the pectoralis, serratus, and rectus abdominis muscles. Patients were followed up in terms of rippling, implant visibility, capsular contracture, and asymmetry. RESULTS: Patients were followed up for an average of 21 months (range, 7 to 28 months). Anatomical, textured, and cohesive gel implants were used, with a mean implant size of 235 cc (range, 180 to 300 cc). In terms of the Baker classification, only 16 percent of the patients had grade II capsular contractures. There were no cases of malpositions, wrinkling, or rippling. Overall satisfaction was quite high (96 percent), and none of the patients required an implant removal or change. CONCLUSIONS: A modification of the subfascial plane was demonstrated where the implants have been placed totally subfascially, in contrast to the traditional subfacial techniques. Satisfactory results have been obtained in terms of breast shape, nipple sensitivity, capsular contracture, and implant visibility. However, more long-term results are needed to evaluate the exact effect of total fascial coverage. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
BACKGROUND: The transaxillary route is a popular method of breast augmentation because it is associated with inconspicuous scars. The subfascial plane carries the advantages and decreases the disadvantages of subglandular and submuscular planes. In the technique described, the authors placed the implant totally subfascially to strengthen the advantages of the traditional subfascial plane. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients (50 breasts) were included in the study from 2009 to 2012. The mean patient age was 27.3 years (range, 19 to 32 years). An axillary incision was performed and the pectoralis major fascia was opened initially. With endoscopic assistance, the dissection continued craniocaudally underneath the fasciae of the pectoralis, serratus, and rectus abdominis muscles. Patients were followed up in terms of rippling, implant visibility, capsular contracture, and asymmetry. RESULTS:Patients were followed up for an average of 21 months (range, 7 to 28 months). Anatomical, textured, and cohesive gel implants were used, with a mean implant size of 235 cc (range, 180 to 300 cc). In terms of the Baker classification, only 16 percent of the patients had grade II capsular contractures. There were no cases of malpositions, wrinkling, or rippling. Overall satisfaction was quite high (96 percent), and none of the patients required an implant removal or change. CONCLUSIONS: A modification of the subfascial plane was demonstrated where the implants have been placed totally subfascially, in contrast to the traditional subfacial techniques. Satisfactory results have been obtained in terms of breast shape, nipple sensitivity, capsular contracture, and implant visibility. However, more long-term results are needed to evaluate the exact effect of total fascial coverage. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.