Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prediction of Implant Size Based on Breast Volume Using Mammography with Fully Automated Measurements and Breast MRI

  • Reconstructive Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Determination of implant size is crucial for patients with breast cancer undergoing one-stage breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study is to predict the implant size based on the breast volume measured by mammography (MG) with a fully automated method, and by breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with a semi-automated method, in breast cancer patients with direct-to-implant reconstruction.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective study included 84 patients with breast cancer who underwent direct-to-implant reconstruction after nipple-sparing or skin-sparing mastectomy and preoperative MG and MRI between April 2015 and April 2019. Breast volume was measured using (a) MG with a fully automated commercial software and (b) MRI with an in-house semi-automated software program. Multivariable regression analyses including breast volume and patient weight (P < 0.05 in univariable analysis) were conducted to predict implant size.

Results

MG and MRI breast volume was highly correlated with both implant size (correlation coefficient 0.862 and 0.867, respectively; P values < 0.001) and specimen weight (correlation coefficient 0.802 and 0.852, respectively; P values < 0.001). Mean absolute difference between the MR breast volume and implant size was 160 cc, which was significantly higher than that between the MG breast volume and implant size of 118 cc (P < 0.001). On multivariable analyses, only breast volume measured by both MG and MRI was significantly associated with implant size in any implant type (all P values < 0.001).

Conclusion

Breast volume measured by MG and MRI can be used to predict appropriate implant size in breast cancer patients undergoing direct-to-implant reconstruction in an efficient and objective manner.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(1):7–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Corso G, De Lorenzi F, Vicini E, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy with different approaches: surgical incisions, complications, and cosmetic results. Preliminary results of 100 consecutive patients at a single center. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2018;71(12):1751–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Frey JD, Salibian AA, Karp NS, Choi M. Implant-based breast reconstruction: hot topics, controversies, and new directions. Plastic Reconst Surg. 2019;143(2):404e–16e.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sbitany H. Breast reconstruction. Surg Clin North Am. 2018;98(4):845–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Colwell AS, Taylor EM. Recent Advances in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;145(2):421e–32e.

  7. Bulstrode N, Bellamy E, Shrotria S. Breast volume assessment: comparing five different techniques. Breast. 2001;10(2):117–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chae MP, Rozen WM, Spychal RT, Hunter-Smith DJ. Breast volumetric analysis for aesthetic planning in breast reconstruction: a literature review of techniques. Gland Surg. 2016;5(2):212–26.

  9. Chen K, Feng CJ, Ma H, et al. Preoperative breast volume evaluation of one-stage immediate breast reconstruction using three-dimensional surface imaging and a printed mold. J Chin Med Assoc. 2019;82(9):732–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Edsander-Nord A, Wickman M, Jurell G. Measurement of breast volume with thermoplastic casts. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 1996;30(2):129–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Killaars RC, Preuß MLG, de Vos NJP, et al. Clinical assessment of breast volume: can 3d imaging be the gold standard? Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2020;8(11):e3236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yip JM, Mouratova N, Jeffery RM, Veitch DE, Woodman RJ, Dean NR. Accurate assessment of breast volume: a study comparing the volumetric gold standard (direct water displacement measurement of mastectomy specimen) with a 3D laser scanning technique. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;68(2):135–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Herold C, Reichelt A, Stieglitz LH, et al. MRI-based breast volumetry-evaluation of three different software solutions. J Digit Imaging. 2010;23(5):603–10.

  14. Herold C, Ueberreiter K, Busche MN, Vogt PM. Autologous fat transplantation: volumetric tools for estimation of volume survival: a systematic review. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2013;37(2):380–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim H, Mun GH, Wiraatmadja ES, et al. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging-based breast volumetry for immediate breast reconstruction. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2015;39(3):369–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Yoo A, Minn KW, Jin US. Magnetic resonance imaging-based volumetric analysis and its relationship to actual breast weight. Arch Plast Surg. 2013;40(3):203–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Teo I, Whelehan P, Macaskill JE, Vinnicombe S, Munnoch DA, Evans A. Volpara™ as a measurement tool for breast volume. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016;69(4):581–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shia WC, Yang HJ, Wu HK, et al. Implant volume estimation in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy. J Surg Res. 2018;231:290–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jeffreys M, Warren R, Highnam R, Smith GD. Initial experiences of using an automated volumetric measure of breast density: the standard mammogram form. Br J Radiol. 2006;79(941):378–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Destounis S, Johnston L, Highnam R, Arieno A, Morgan R, Chan A. Using volumetric breast density to quantify the potential masking risk of mammographic density. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208(1):222–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jang HJ, Kim HJ, Chae YS, et al. Effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on breast tissue composition: a longitudinal mammographic study with automated volumetric measurement. Eur Radiol. 2020;30:4785–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wolf I, Vetter M, Wegner I, et al. The medical imaging interaction toolkit. Med Image Anal. 2005;9(6):594–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Maleike D, Nolden M, Meinzer HP, Wolf I. Interactive segmentation framework of the Medical Imaging Interaction Toolkit. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2009;96(1):72–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Schultz RC, Dolezal RF, Nolan J. Further applications of Archimedes' principle in the correction of asymmetrical breasts. Ann Plast Surg. 1986;16(2):98–101.

  25. Tezel E, Numanoglu A. Practical do-it-yourself device for accurate volume measurement of breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105(3):1019–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R, et al. Comparison between breast volume measurement using 3D surface imaging and classical techniques. Breast. 2007;16(2):137–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Fung JT, Chan SW, Chiu AN, Cheung PS, Lam SH. Mammographic determination of breast volume by elliptical cone estimation. World J Surg. 2010;34(7):1442–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kalbhen CL, McGill JJ, Fendley PM, Corrigan KW, Angelats J. Mammographic determination of breast volume: comparing different methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173(6):1643–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Brown RW, Cheng YC, Kurtay M. A formula for surgical modifications of the breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;106(6):1342–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Malini S, Smith EO, Goldzieher JW. Measurement of breast volume by ultrasound during normal menstrual cycles and with oral contraceptive use. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;66(4):538–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sotsuka Y, Fujikawa M, Izumi K. Volume of deep inferior epigastric perforator flap quantified preoperatively by using 64-multidetector-row computed tomography. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012;65(11):1601–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Koch MC, Adamietz B, Jud SM, et al. Breast volumetry using a three-dimensional surface assessment technique. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2011;35(5):847–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kim WH, Moon WK, Kim SM, et al. Variability of breast density assessment in short-term reimaging with digital mammography. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82(10):1724–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), the Kyungpook National University Hospital (2021) and grant-funded by the Korean government (MSIT) (no. 2020R1C1C1006453, no. 2019R1G1A1098655, and no. 2021R1G1A1007686), the Ministry of Education (no. 2020R1I1A3074639) and by the Biomedical Research Institute.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Won Hwa Kim and Joon Seok Lee have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Yeungnam University Hospital, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Republic of Korea

    Young Seon Kim MD & Seung Eun Lee MD

  2. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea

    Hyun Geun Cho MD, Jung Dug Yang MD, PhD & Joon Seok Lee MD, PhD

  3. School of Computer Science and Engineering, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea

    Jaeil Kim PhD & Sung Joon Park MS

  4. Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea

    Hye Jung Kim MD, PhD & Won Hwa Kim MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Young Seon Kim MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hyun Geun Cho MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jaeil Kim PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sung Joon Park MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hye Jung Kim MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Seung Eun Lee MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jung Dug Yang MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Won Hwa Kim MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Joon Seok Lee MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Won Hwa Kim MD, PhD or Joon Seok Lee MD, PhD.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 17 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, Y.S., Cho, H.G., Kim, J. et al. Prediction of Implant Size Based on Breast Volume Using Mammography with Fully Automated Measurements and Breast MRI. Ann Surg Oncol 29, 7845–7854 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11972-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11972-9

Search

Navigation