Javier Monton1,2,3, Asia Torres4, Maria Gijon4, Luis Chang-Azancot4, Nitzan Kenig4, P Camelia Trandafir5, Joaquin Jordan6, Ricardo Insausti7. 1. Plastic Surgery Department, Albacete University Hospital, Castilla-La Mancha Health Service (SESCAM), Albacete, Spain. Javier.Monton@uclm.es. 2. Anatomy and Embryology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM), Albacete, Spain. Javier.Monton@uclm.es. 3. Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery Institute, Altozano Square, 3 - 6th Floor, Albacete, 02001, Spain. Javier.Monton@uclm.es. 4. Plastic Surgery Department, Albacete University Hospital, Castilla-La Mancha Health Service (SESCAM), Albacete, Spain. 5. Department of Statistics, Informatics and Mathematics, Public University of Navarre (UPNA), Pamplona, Spain. 6. Pharmacology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM), Albacete, Spain. 7. Anatomy and Embryology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM), Albacete, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Different procedures are available to help clinicians evaluate symmetry and cosmetic results in an objective manner after conservative breast cancer surgery. However, there are no similar methods in esthetic breast surgery, where the subjective assessment of the surgeon or the patient is usually considered the gold standard. The aim of this study is to evaluate the application of four software programs in the context of esthetic breast surgery and contrast their results with those of the subjective evaluation by a series of healthcare professionals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty cosmetic breast surgery images were studied using four software programs considered appropriate for the objective evaluation (BCCT3.core®, Breast Analyzing Tool®, Objective Breast Cosmesis Scale® and GBAI-Global Breast Asymmetry Index®). The same cases were assessed by a group of 100 health professionals through an online survey as a subjective evaluation method. RESULTS: Concordance among participants was high (κ = 0.753) as well as between three of the objective methods (BSI, OBCS, GBAI), but not with the BCCT parameter. There was no association between objective and subjective methods studied by the survey, according to the logistic regression model. The "symmetry" and "asymmetry" categories were accurately distinguished by the objective methods. CONCLUSIONS: Objective evaluation in esthetic breast surgery has less variability than subjective assessment, and the estimation is possible through certain software previously restricted to conservative breast cancer surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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 www.springer.com/00266 .
BACKGROUND: Different procedures are available to help clinicians evaluate symmetry and cosmetic results in an objective manner after conservative breast cancer surgery. However, there are no similar methods in esthetic breast surgery, where the subjective assessment of the surgeon or the patient is usually considered the gold standard. The aim of this study is to evaluate the application of four software programs in the context of esthetic breast surgery and contrast their results with those of the subjective evaluation by a series of healthcare professionals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty cosmetic breast surgery images were studied using four software programs considered appropriate for the objective evaluation (BCCT3.core®, Breast Analyzing Tool®, Objective Breast Cosmesis Scale® and GBAI-Global Breast Asymmetry Index®). The same cases were assessed by a group of 100 health professionals through an online survey as a subjective evaluation method. RESULTS: Concordance among participants was high (κ = 0.753) as well as between three of the objective methods (BSI, OBCS, GBAI), but not with the BCCT parameter. There was no association between objective and subjective methods studied by the survey, according to the logistic regression model. The "symmetry" and "asymmetry" categories were accurately distinguished by the objective methods. CONCLUSIONS: Objective evaluation in esthetic breast surgery has less variability than subjective assessment, and the estimation is possible through certain software previously restricted to conservative breast cancer surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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 www.springer.com/00266 .
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast; Esthetics; Plastic surgery; Reproducibility of results
Authors: My Pham; Robert Alzul; Elisabeth Elder; James French; Jaime Cardoso; Ahmad Kaviani; Farid Meybodi Journal: Aesthetic Plast Surg Date: 2022-09-23 Impact factor: 2.708