Author:
Vogt Peter M.,Mackowski Marian S.,Dastagir Khaled
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The aesthetic long-term stability in shape, symmetry, and natural appearance of an aesthetically augmented breast remains a constant challenge. It has become clear that the results depend strongly on the technique applied and the experience of the surgeon. An ongoing controversy concerns the positioning of the implants. Subglandular, submuscular, partial submuscular, and subfascial pockets have different tradeoffs and advantages. However, secondary deformity, unnatural feel, and appearance are not addressed uniformly. The aim of the following study was to establish a standard procedure allowing for the desired and reproducible results to provide long-term stability and aesthetic quality.
Methods
The authors have developed a standardized dissection of a dynamic implant pocket. In this approach, a submuscular dissection with lower and medial release of the pectoralis muscle is combined with a wide subfascial release of the breast gland and a scoring of the deep plane of the superficial glandular fascia. In the final step, the deep layer of the glandular fascia is sutured tightly and firmly to the deep layer of the abdomino-pectoral fascia. A total of 867 patients received a 4D pocket–based breast implant by the authors. A subset of 33 patients was further analyzed for long-term results. Retrospectively, all data were analyzed from the electronic patient information system and files of patients using GraphPad 8. For comparison of multiple experimental groups, one-way ANOVA was performed where indicated.
Results
The concept not only addresses the biplanar approach of submuscular implant placement (3D) but adds the 4th dimension (4D) of an aesthetically pleasing dynamic shape of the augmented breast providing long-term stability. Measurements—taken at 3 months, and 1, 2, 3, 5, and ≥ 7 years post augmentation—for SN-N, N-IMF, N-ML, and MC-N distances did not show any significant changes over time. In the patient cohort of 867 patients (1734 implants), the overall complication rate was < 5%. Revisions for bleeding were below 0.5%. Shape stability was observed over 7 years in more than 95% of the patients.
Conclusions
Our results indicate that our technique of multiplane breast augmentation provides long-term stability and aesthetic quality. It may solve some of the existing tradeoffs of the different methods by combining the benefits of each technique supported by an additional shaping through a controlled deep fasciotomy.
Level of evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study.
Funder
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH)
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference24 articles.
1. Cronin TD, Gerow FJ (1963) Augmentation mammaplasty: a new “natural feel” prothesis. Transactions of the third international congress of plastic and reconstructive surgery, Washington. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam, pp 41–49
2. Dempsey WC, Latham WD (1968) Subpectoral implants in augmentation mammaplasty Preliminary report. Plast Reconstr Surg 42:215
3. Tebbetts JB (2001) Dual plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant-soft-tissue relationships in a wide range of breast types. Plast Reconstr Surg 107(5):1255–1272
4. Graf RM, Bernardes A, Rippel R, Araujo LR, Damasio RC, Auersvald A (2003) Subfascial breast implant: a new procedure. Plast Reconstr Surg 111(2):904–908
5. Sampaio Goes JC (2010) Breast implant stability in the subfascial plane and the new shaped silicone gel breast implants. Aesthetic Plast Surg 34(1):23–28
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献