Literature DB >> 24377697

Preoperative implant selection for two stage breast reconstruction with 3D imaging.

Pawel Szychta1, Cameron Raine2, Mark Butterworth2, Ken Stewart2, Henryk Witmanowski3, Marek Zadrozny4, Jan Rykala5.   

Abstract

Implants used for two-stage breast reconstruction are selected exclusively on the basis of the directly measured linear parameters. Therefore, the relevant implant is not always chosen despite the wide range of available products. The aim was to analyze the clinical usefulness of three-dimensional (3D) imaging in the breast implant selection. In 50 patients after unilateral two-stage breast reconstruction, height, width, projection and total volume of both breasts were triply obtained with measuring tape (anthropometric method), thermoplastic casting (thermoplastic method) and 3D imaging (optical method). We measured skin fold thickness with skin caliper. In the optical method, we subtracted the covering tissues and calculated the parameter - "estimated breast implant volume" (EBIV), together with the corresponding "anthropometrically estimated breast implant volume" (aEBIV) in the anthropometric method. Reliability of the three methods was described as repeatability and accuracy, both quantified with parameters: "technical error measurement" (TEM) and "reliability factor" (R). Repeatability showed variation among the repeated measurements. Accuracy determined variability between the real volume of the implant used for reconstruction and the obtained volumetric parameters. Repeatability was the highest for the optical method, comparing to anthropometric and thermoplastic methods (p<0.0001). Accuracy was the highest in the optical method for EBIV, comparing to aEBIV in the anthropometric method and the total volume in three methods (p<0.0001). Level of accuracy for EBIV was in the range of variability among the commercially available implants (p>0.05). In conclusion, implants for breast reconstruction are precisely selected with the 3D scanning method, in comparison to widely used direct measurements or thermoplastic casting.
© 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D imaging; Breast implant selection; Preoperative planning; Two stage breast reconstruction

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24377697     DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2013.09.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Biol Med        ISSN: 0010-4825            Impact factor:   4.589


  5 in total

Review 1.  Implant selection in the setting of prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Allen Gabriel; G Patrick Maxwell
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-02

2.  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

Review 3.  Autologous fat transfer to the subcutaneous tissue in the context of breast reconstructive procedures.

Authors:  Pawel Szychta; Marek Zadrozny; Jan Rykala; Lukasz Banasiak; Henryk Witmanowski
Journal:  Postepy Dermatol Alergol       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 1.837

4.  Predictive value of 3D imaging to guide implant selection in immediate breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Monica Yu; Mary-Helen Mahoney; Gordon Soon; Brian Pinchuk; Ron Somogyi
Journal:  JPRAS Open       Date:  2021-10-29

5.  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
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.