A Technique to Decrease Breast Shape Deformity During Muscle Contraction in Submuscular Augmentation Mammaplasty
- 326 Downloads
The main objective of this study was to decrease breast shape distortion during pectoralis muscle contraction following submuscular augmentation mammaplasty. We followed 348 patients who had retromuscular augmentation mammoplasty: 251 (72.1%) had polyurethane-covered gel-filled, 97 (27.9%) had textured-silicone gel-filled implants. Among the 348, 46 had surgery following the Regnault technique and 302 had surgery by the below-mentioned technique. Periareolar incision, bipartision of breast parenchima down to the fascia, undermining of breast base from the fascia downward to the inframammary sulcus or a little below it, detaching of muscle off the thoracic cage, disinsertion of abdomino-costal pectoralis attachments. Full thickness incision of pectoralis muscle on a vertical line on the nipple projection for 2–5 inches. Placing of prothesis. Drainage. Closure. No objective evaluation was used, only clinical judgments by three observers—the surgeon, a nurse and the patient herself. The results showed a definite decrease of the dynamic deformity among patients in whom the author’s technical variation was carried out. This technique allows also, for decreasing the upward pushing of the implant during pectoralis muscle contraction and facilitates stretch of the breast tissue in patients with tighter breast envelopes. Despite lack of precise measurements, conclusions drawn from clinical judgments, taken as objectively as possible, suggest that the use of this technique may offer the solution of an otherwise disturbing collateral effect, frequently seen after this operation.
KeywordsMastoplasty Retromuscular Implants Muscle contraction Breast shape Dynamic deformation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Puckett, CL, Croll, GH, Reichel, CA, Concannon, MJ 1987A critical look at capsular contracture in subglandular versus subpectoral mammary augmentation.Aesth Plast Surg1123Google Scholar
- 2.Vazquez, B, Given, KS, Houston, GC 1987Brest augmentation: A review of subglandular and submuscular implantation.Aesth Plast Surg11101Google Scholar
- 5.Griffiths Jr, CO 1969The submuscular implants in augmentation mammaplasty P.1009.Sanvenero-Rosselli, G eds. Transaction of 4th International Congress of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Rome, October 1967. Excepta Medica Int. Congr. Series n°174)Excepta MedicaAmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- 8.Ramirez, OM, Heller, MDL, Tebbetts, JB 2002Dual plane breast augmentation: Avoiding pectoralis major displacement.Plast Reconstr Surg15110Google Scholar
- 10.Hidalgo, DA 2000Breast augmentation: Choosing the optimal incision, implant, and pocket plane.Plast Reconstr Surg1056Google Scholar
- 11.Asplund, O, Gylbert, L, Jurell, G, Ward, C 1996Textured or smooth implants for submuscular breast augmentation: A controlled study.Plast Reconstr Surg976Google Scholar
- 12.Gray, H 1935Anatomy: Descriptive and Applied, 26th Ed.LongmansLondonGoogle Scholar
- 15.Hoffman, GW, Elliott, LF 1987The anatomy of the pectoral nerves and its significance to the general and plastic surgeon.Ann Surg5205Google Scholar
- 16.Maxwell, GP, Perry, L 1995The capsule in various types of breast implants.Plast Reconstr Surg595Google Scholar