Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 36, Issue 5, pp 1096–1104 | Cite as

Comparison of Breast Augmentation Incisions and Common Complications

  • Ross L. StutmanEmail author
  • Mark Codner
  • Amy Mahoney
  • Amei Amei
Original Article Breast



Incisions for insertion of breast implants are most commonly placed in the inframammary fold, areola, or axilla. Previous studies have evaluated selection of incision location preoperatively and for nipple–areola complex sensation retention after primary augmentation mammaplasty. This study compares the most common postoperative complications for each incision location in patients who underwent primary breast augmentation.


A retrospective chart review was performed on 619 patients who underwent primary breast augmentation, excluding simultaneous mastopexy, within a single group practice from July 1994 to June 2009. Incision location, postoperative complications (capsular contracture, hematoma formation, rippling, infection, and rupture), and total reoperation rates were recorded. Incision locations were also compared with respect to implant fill type (saline or silicone gel) and pocket location (subglandular or submuscular).


A statistically significant association was identified between total reoperation and incision location (p = 0.0054). The highest rate of total reoperation occurred when using an inframammary fold incision compared to either the transaxillary or periareolar. This relationship with total reoperation was not attributed to the five complications analyzed, but rather with patient desire for size/style change, asymmetry, or ptosis. No statistically significant association was observed between incision location and specific complications such as capsular contracture, rippling, implant rupture, hematoma, or infection.


None of the five complications analyzed correlated with incision location. The data generated from this study will assure the surgeon that all three incision locations are safe. Preoperative examination, patient preference, and surgeon comfort should remain the mainstays of incision planning in augmentation mammaplasty.

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 at


Breast augmentation Breast augmentation incision Breast augmentation complications Capsular contracture 



The authors thank Dr. T. Roderick Hester, Dr. Foad Nahai, Dr. Farzad Nahai, and Paces Plastic Surgery for allowing the use of patient data in this study.

Conflict of Interest

M. A. Codner has served as a consultant to Mentor Worldwide LLC. He has also received educational grants from Mentor and receives royalties for books published by Quality Medical Publishing and Elsevier Publishing Company. R. L. Stutman, A. Mahoney, and A. Amei have no conflicts of interest to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Cosmetic Surgery National Databank Statistics (2010) American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. Accessed 2 Nov 2011
  2. 2.
    Spear SL, Bulan EJ, Venturi ML (2004) Breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 114(5):73e–81ePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hoehler H (1973) Breast augmentation: the trans-axillary approach. Br J Plast Surg 26:371Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jones FR, Taura AP (1973) A periareolar incision for augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 51(6):641–644PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McKinney P, Shedbalker AR (1974) Augmentation mammaplasty using a non-inflatable prosthesis through a circum-areolar incision. Br J Plast Surg 27(1):35–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pacella SJ, Codner MA (2009) The transaxillary approach to breast augmentation. Clin Plast Surg 36(1):49–61, viGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tebbetts J, Adams W (2006) Five critical decisions in breast augmentation using five measurements in 5 minutes: the high five decision process. Plast Reconstr Surg 118(7S):35S–45SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Courtiss EH, Goldwyn RM (1976) Breast sensation before and after plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 58(1):1–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mofid MM, Klatsky SA, Singh NK et al (2006) Nipple–areola complex sensitivity after primary breast augmentation: a comparison of periareolar and inframammary incision approaches. Plast Reconstr Surg 117(6):1694–1698PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Okwueze MI, Spear ME, Zwyghuizen AM et al (2006) Effect of augmentation mammaplasty on breast sensation. Plast Reconstr Surg 117(1):73–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alpert BS, Lalonde DH (2008) MOC-PSSM CME Article: breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 121(4):1–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hildago DA (2000) Breast augmentation: choosing the optimal incision, implant, and pocket plane. Plast Reconstr Surg 105(6):2202–2216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Adams WP (2008) The process of breast augmentation: four sequential steps for optimizing outcomes for patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 122(6):1892–1900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wiener TC (2008) Relationship of incision choice to capsular contracture. Aesthet Plast Surg 32(2):303–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bengston BP, Van Natta BW, Murphy DK et al (2007) Style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implant core study results at 3 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 120(Suppl 1):40SGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spear SL, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Walker PS; Inamed Silicone Breast Implant U.S. Study Group (2007) Inamed silicone breast implant core study results at 6 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 120(Suppl 1):8S–16S; discussion 17S–18SGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cunningham BL (2007) The Mentor core study on silicone MemoryGel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 120(Suppl 1):19S–29SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cunningham B, McCue J (2009) Safety and effectiveness of Mentor’s MemoryGel implants at 6 years. Aesthet Plast Surg 33(3):439–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Handel N, Cordray T, Gutierrez J et al (2006) A long-term study of outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction with breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 117(3):757–767PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hipps CJ, Raju DR, Straith RE (1978) Influence of some operative and postoperative factors on capsular contracture around breast prostheses. Plast Reconstr Surg 61(3):384–389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reece EM, Ghavami A, Hoxworth RE et al (2009) Primary breast augmentation today: a survey of current breast augmentation practice patterns. Aesthet Surg J 29(2):116–121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fanous N, Tawilé C, Brousseau VJ (2008) Minimal inframammary incision for breast augmentation. Can J Plast Surg 16(1):14–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Allen S (2004) FDA breast implant consumer handbook—2004. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Transcript of the FDA Panel, Mentor hearings (April 2005). Accessed 2 Nov 2011
  25. 25.
    FDA Summary Panel Memorandum: Mentor P030053. Accessed 2 Nov 2011
  26. 26.
    Puckett CL, Croll GH, Reichel CA, Concannon MJ (1987) A critical look at capsular contracture in subglandular versus subpectoral mammary augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 11(1):23–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Biggs TM, Yarish RS (1990) Augmentation mammaplasty: a comparative analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 85(3):368–372PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Barnsley PG, Sigurdson LJ, Barnsley SE (2006) Textured-surface breast implants in the prevention of capsular contracture among breast augmentation patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Plast Reconstr Surg 117(7):2182–2190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McCurdy JA Jr (2009) Capsular contracture following augmentation mammaplasty: etiology and pathogenesis. In: Shiffman MA (ed) Breast augmentation principles and practice, 1st edn. Springer, Berlin, pp 525–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Snell L, Brown M (2009) Breast implant capsules and subclinical infection. Plast Reconstr Surg 124(4S):38Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tran VT, Del Pozo JL, Petty PM et al (2009) Bacteria on breast implants are associated with capsular contracture. Plast Reconstr Surg 124(4S):38–39Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Adams WP Jr (2009) Capsular contracture: What is it? What causes it? How can it be prevented and managed? Clin Plast Surg 36:119–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tamboto H, Vickery K, Deva AK (2010) Subclinical (biofilm) infection causes capsular contracture in a porcine model following augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 126(3):835–842PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pajkos A, Deva AK, Vickery K et al (2003) Detection of subclinical infection in significant breast implant capsules. Plast Reconstr Surg 111(5):1605–1611PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wong C, Samuel M, Tan B et al (2006) Capsular contracture in subglandular breast augmentation with textured versus smooth breast implants: a systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg 118(5):1224–1236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schaub T, Ahmad J, Rohrich RJ (2010) Capsular contracture with breast implants in the cosmetic patient: saline versus silicone—a systematic review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 126(6):2140–2149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Araco A, Caruso R, Araco F et al (2009) Capsular contracture: a systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg 124(6):1808–1819PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Burkhardt BR, Eades E (1995) The effect of Biocell texturing and povidone-iodine irrigation on capsular contracture around saline-inflatable breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 96(6):1317–1325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Al-Sabounchi S, De Mey AM, Eder H (2006) Textured saline-filled breast implants for augmentation mammoplasty: Does overfilling prevent deflation? A long-term follow-up. Plast Reconstr Surg 118(1):215–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Handel N, Jensen JA, Black Q et al (1995) The fate of breast implants: a critical analysis of complications and outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 96(7):1521–1533PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Codner MA, Mejia JD, Locke MB et al (2011) A 15-year experience with primary breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 127(3):1300–1310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Nahabedian M, Patel K (2008) Management of common and uncommon problems after primary breast augmentation. Clin Plast Surg 36:127–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Cunningham B (2007) The Mentor study on contour profile gel silicone MemoryGel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 120(7):33S–39SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cunningham BL, Lokeh A, Gutowski KA (2000) Saline-filled breast implant safety and efficacy: a multicenter retrospective review. Plast Reconstr Surg 105(6):2143–2149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Walker PS, Walls B, Murphy DK (2009) Natrelle saline-filled breast implants: a prospective 10-year study. Aesthet Surg J 29:19–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Araco A, Gravante G, Araco F et al (2007) Infections of breast implants in aesthetic breast augmentations: a single-center review of 3,002 patients. Aesthet Plast Surg 31(4):325–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Collis N, Sharpe DT (2000) Silicone gel-filled breast implant integrity: a retrospective review of 478 consecutively explanted implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:1979PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Collis N, Sharpe DT (2000) Recurrence of subglandular breast implant capsular contracture: anterior versus total capsulectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 106:792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ross L. Stutman
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mark Codner
    • 1
  • Amy Mahoney
    • 1
  • Amei Amei
    • 2
  1. 1.Mark Codner, M.D. Plastic SurgeryAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mathematical SciencesUniversity of Nevada Las VegasLas VegasUSA

Personalised recommendations