Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 135, Issue 3, pp 629–637

Recommendations for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment

  • Maria João Cardoso
  • Jaime Santos Cardoso
  • Conny Vrieling
  • Douglas Macmillan
  • Dick Rainsbury
  • Joerg Heil
  • Eric Hau
  • Mohammed Keshtgar
Review

Abstract

During the Turning Subjective Into Objective seminar held in Lisbon in May 2011, experts in the topic gathered to discuss the unsolved problems of aesthetic evaluation of breast-conserving treatment (BCT). The purpose of this study is to review the main methodological issues related to the aesthetic evaluation of BCT, to discuss currently used methods of evaluation and the lack of a gold standard, and to write a set of recommendations that can be used as guidance for the aesthetic evaluation of BCT.

Keywords

Breast cancer conservative treatment Assessment Aesthetic results Recommendations 

References

  1. 1.
    Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, Jeong JH, Wolmark N (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(16):1233–1241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, Aguilar M, Marubini E (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(16):1227–1232PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Christiaens MR, van der Schueren E, Vantongelen K (1996) More detailed documentation of operative procedures in breast conserving treatment: what good will it do us? Eur J Surg Oncol 22(4):326–330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Christie D, O’Brien M, Christie J, Kron T, Ferguson S, Hamilton C, Denham J (1996) A comparison of methods of cosmetic assessment in breast conservation treatment. Breast 5:358–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cardoso JS, Cardoso MJ (2007) Towards an intelligent medical system for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Artif Intell Med 40(2):115–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Amaral N, Azevedo I, Barreau L, Bernardo M, Christie D, Costa S, Fitzal F, Fougo JL, Johansen J, Macmillan D, Mano MP, Regolo L, Rosa J, Teixeira L, Vrieling C (2007) Turning subjective into objective: the BCCT.core software for evaluation of cosmetic results in breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast 16(5):456–461PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cardoso MJ, Magalhaes A, Almeida T, Costa S, Vrieling C, Christie D, Johansen J, Cardoso JS (2008) Is face-only photographic view enough for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment? Breast Cancer Res Treat 112(3):565–568PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hau E, Browne LH, Khanna S, Cail S, Cert G, Chin Y, Clark C, Inder S, Szwajcer A, Graham PH (2011) Radiotherapy breast boost with reduced whole-breast dose is associated with improved cosmesis: the results of a comprehensive assessment from the St. George and Wollongong randomized breast boost trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(2):682–689PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heil J, Carolus A, Dahlkamp J, Golatta M, Domschke C, Schuetz F, Blumenstein M, Rauch G, Sohn C (2011) Objective assessment of aesthetic outcome after breast conserving therapy: Subjective third party panel rating and objective BCCT.core software evaluation. Breast. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2011.07.013
  10. 10.
    Heil J, Dahlkamp J, Golatta M, Rom J, Domschke C, Rauch G, Cardoso MJ, Sohn C (2010) Aesthetics in breast conserving therapy: do objectively measured results match patients’ evaluations? Ann Surg Oncol 18(1):134–138PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Keshtgar M, Williams N, Corica T, Saunders C, Joseph D, Group TT (2011) Significantly better cosmetic outcome after intra-operative radiotherapy compared with external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer: objective assesment of patients from a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg Oncol 18(2):S171Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rainsbury RM (2007) Surgery insight: oncoplastic breast-conserving reconstruction–indications, benefits, choices and outcomes. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 4(11):657–664PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rainsbury RM, MacNeill F (2009) Surgery for breast cancer. Oncoplastic surgery is promising. BMJ 338:b1743. doi:10.1136/bmj.b1743 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vrieling C, Collette L, Bartelink E, Borger JH, Brenninkmeyer SJ, Horiot JC, Pierart M, Poortmans PM, Struikmans H, Van der Schueren E, Van Dongen JA, Van Limbergen E, Bartelink H (1999) Validation of the methods of cosmetic assessment after breast-conserving therapy in the EORTC “boost versus no boost” trial. EORTC radiotherapy and breast cancer cooperative groups. European Organization for research and treatment of cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 45(3):667–676PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vrieling C, Collette L, Fourquet A, Hoogenraad WJ, Horiot JH, Jager JJ, Pierart M, Poortmans PM, Struikmans H, Maat B, Van Limbergen E, Bartelink H (2000) The influence of patient, tumor and treatment factors on the cosmetic results after breast-conserving therapy in the EORTC ‘boost vs. no boost’ trial. EORTC Radiotherapy and Breast Cancer Cooperative Groups. Radiother Oncol 55(3):219–232PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook RH (1984) Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health 74(9):979–983PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cochrane RA, Valasiadou P, Wilson AR, Al-Ghazal SK, Macmillan RD (2003) Cosmesis and satisfaction after breast-conserving surgery correlates with the percentage of breast volume excised. Br J Surg 90(12):1505–1509PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pezner RD, Patterson MP, Hill LR, Vora N, Desai KR, Archambeau JO, Lipsett JA (1985) Breast retraction assessment: an objective evaluation of cosmetic results of patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 11(3):575–578PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Van Limbergen E, van der Schueren E, Van Tongelen K (1989) Cosmetic evaluation of breast conserving treatment for mammary cancer. 1. Proposal of a quantitative scoring system. Radiother Oncol 16(3):159–167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Triedman SA, Osteen R, Harris JR (1990) Factors influencing cosmetic outcome of conservative surgery and radiotherapy for breast cancer. Surg Clin N Am 70(4):901–916PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Krishnan L, Stanton AL, Collins CA, Liston VE, Jewell WR (2001) Form or function? Part 2. Objective cosmetic and functional correlates of quality of life in women treated with breast-conserving surgical procedures and radiotherapy. Cancer 91(12):2282–2287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sacchini V, Luini A, Tana S, Lozza L, Galimberti V, Merson M, Agresti R, Veronesi P, Greco M (1991) Quantitative and qualitative cosmetic evaluation after conservative treatment for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 27(11):1395–1400PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Al-Ghazal SK, Blamey RW, Stewart J, Morgan AA (1999) The cosmetic outcome in early breast cancer treated with breast conservation. Eur J Surg Oncol 25(6):566–570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Yarnold JR, Broderick M, Regan J, Ross G, Goddard A (1992) Cosmetic and functional outcomes of breast conserving treatment for early stage breast cancer. 1. Comparison of patients’ ratings, observers’ ratings, and objective assessments. Radiother Oncol 25(3):153–159PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kurtz J (1995) Impact of radiotherapy on breast cosmesis. Breast 4:163–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Al-Ghazal SK, Blamey RW (1999) Cosmetic assessment of breast-conserving surgery for primary breast cancer. Breast 8(4):162–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Al-Ghazal SK, Fallowfield L, Blamey RW (1999) Patient evaluation of cosmetic outcome after conserving surgery for treatment of primary breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 25(4):344–346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Clarke D, Martinez A, Cox RS (1983) Analysis of cosmetic results and complications in patients with stage I and II breast cancer treated by biopsy and irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 9(12):1807–1813PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Borger JH, Keijser AH (1987) Conservative breast cancer treatment: analysis of cosmetic results and the role of concomitant adjuvant chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 13(8):1173–1177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Beadle GF, Come S, Henderson IC, Silver B, Hellman S, Harris JR (1984) The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on the cosmetic results after primary radiation treatment for early stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 10(11):2131–2137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Harris JR, Levene MB, Svensson G, Hellman S (1979) Analysis of cosmetic results following primary radiation therapy for stages I and II carcinoma of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 5(2):257–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kaija H, Rauni S, Jorma I, Matti H (1997) Consistency of patient- and doctor-assessed cosmetic outcome after conservative treatment of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 45(3):225–228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Liljegren G, Holmberg L, Westman G (1993) The cosmetic outcome in early breast cancer treated with sector resection with or without radiotherapy. Uppsala-Orebro Breast Cancer Study Group. Eur J Cancer 29A(15):2083–2089PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stanton AL, Krishnan L, Collins CA (2001) Form or function? Part 1. Subjective cosmetic and functional correlates of quality of life in women treated with breast-conserving surgical procedures and radiotherapy. Cancer 91(12):2273–2281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Heil J, Czink E, Golatta M, Schott S, Hof H, Jenetzky E, Blumenstein M, Maleika A, Rauch G, Sohn C (2011) Change of aesthetic and functional outcome over time and their relationship to quality of life after breast conserving therapy. Eur J Surg Oncol 37(2):116–121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Waljee JF, Hu ES, Ubel PA, Smith DM, Newman LA, Alderman AK (2008) Effect of esthetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery on psychosocial functioning and quality of life. J Clin Oncol 26(20):3331–3337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sacchini V, Luini A, Agresti R, Greco M, Manzari A, Mariani L, Zucali R, McCormick B (1995) The influence of radiotherapy on cosmetic outcome after breast conservative surgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 33(1):59–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Abner AL, Recht A, Vicini FA, Silver B, Hayes D, Come S, Harris JR (1991) Cosmetic results after surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy for early breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 21(2):331–338PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ash DV, Benson EA, Sainsbury JR, Round C, Head C (1995) Seven-year follow-up on 334 patients treated by breast conserving surgery and short course radical postoperative radiotherapy: a report of the Yorkshire Breast Cancer Group. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 7(2):93–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gray JR, McCormick B, Cox L, Yahalom J (1991) Primary breast irradiation in large-breasted or heavy women: analysis of cosmetic outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 21(2):347–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lindsey I, Serpell JW, Johnson WR, Rodger A (1997) Cosmesis following complete local excision of breast cancer. Aust N Z J Surg 67(7):428–432PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Amichetti M, Busana L, Caffo O (1995) Long-term cosmetic outcome and toxicity in patients treated with quadrantectomy and radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer. Oncology 52(3):177–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    D’Aniello C, Grimaldi L, Barbato A, Bosi B, Carli A (1999) Cosmetic results in 242 patients treated by conservative surgery for breast cancer. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 33(4):419–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Davidson NG, Khanna S, Windle R, Barrie WW, Agrawal RK, Mitchell S (1990) Cosmetic results of early breast carcinoma treated with wide local excision, external beam radiotherapy and iridium-192 boost. J R Coll Surg Edinb 35(3):175–177PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    de la Rochefordiere A, Abner AL, Silver B, Vicini F, Recht A, Harris JR (1992) Are cosmetic results following conservative surgery and radiation therapy for early breast cancer dependent on technique? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 23(5):925–931PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sarin R, Dinshaw KA, Shrivastava SK, Sharma V, Deore SM (1993) Therapeutic factors influencing the cosmetic outcome and late complications in the conservative management of early breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 27(2):285–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dewar JA, Benhamou S, Benhamou E, Arriagada R, Petit JY, Fontaine F, Sarrazin D (1988) Cosmetic results following lumpectomy, axillary dissection and radiotherapy for small breast cancers. Radiother Oncol 12(4):273–280PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Touboul E, Belkacemi Y, Lefranc JP, Uzan S, Ozsahin M, Korbas D, Buffat L, Balosso J, Pene F, Blondon J et al (1995) Early breast cancer: influence of type of boost (electrons vs iridium-192 implant) on local control and cosmesis after conservative surgery and radiation therapy. Radiother Oncol 34(2):105–113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Danoff BF, Goodman RL, Glick JH, Haller DG, Pajak TF (1983) The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on cosmesis and complications in patients with breast cancer treated by definitive irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 9(11):1625–1630PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Eadie C, Herd A, Stallard S (2000) An investigation into digital imaging in assessing cosmetic outcome after breast surgery. J Audiov Media Med 23(1):12–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Fagundes MA, Fagundes HM, Brito CS, Fagundes MH, Daudt A, Bruno LA, Azevedo SJ, Fagundes LA (1993) Breast-conserving surgery and definitive radiation: a comparison between quadrantectomy and local excision with special focus on local-regional control and cosmesis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 27(3):553–560PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Greco M, Sacchini V, Agresti A, Luini MdV, Farante G, Raselli R (1994) Quadrantectomy is not a disfiguring operation for small breast cancer. Breast 3(1):3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Roelstraete A, Van Lancker M, De Schryver A, Storme G (1993) Adjuvant radiation after conservative surgery for early breast cancer. Local control and cosmetic outcome. Am J Clin Oncol 16(4):284–290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rose MA, Olivotto I, Cady B, Koufman C, Osteen R, Silver B, Recht A, Harris JR (1989) Conservative surgery and radiation therapy for early breast cancer. Long-term cosmetic results. Arch Surg 124(2):153–157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Cetintas SK, Ozkan L, Kurt M, Saran A, Tasdelen I, Tolunay S, Topal U, Engin K (2002) Factors influencing cosmetic results after breast conserving management (Turkish experience). Breast 11(1):72–80. doi:10.1054/brst.2001.0372 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Van Dam FS, Aaranson NK, Engelsmen E (1998) Various aspects of ‘quality of life’ and the treatment of patients with breast cancer. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 132(29):1323–1326Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Pezner RD, Lipsett JA, Vora NL, Desai KR (1985) Limited usefulness of observer-based cosmesis scales employed to evaluate patients treated conservatively for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 11(6):1117–1119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wazer DE, DiPetrillo T, Schmidt-Ullrich R, Weld L, Smith TJ, Marchant DJ, Robert NJ (1992) Factors influencing cosmetic outcome and complication risk after conservative surgery and radiotherapy for early-stage breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 10(3):356–363PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Bajaj AK, Kon PS, Oberg KC, Miles DA (2004) Aesthetic outcomes in patients undergoing breast conservation therapy for the treatment of localized breast cancer. Plast Reconstr Surg 114(6):1442–1449PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Tsouskas LI, Fentiman IS (1990) Breast compliance: a new method for evaluation of cosmetic outcome after conservative treatment of early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 15(3):185–190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Noguchi M, Saito Y, Mizukami Y, Nonomura A, Ohta N, Koyasaki N, Taniya T, Miyazaki I (1991) Breast deformity, its correction, and assessment of breast conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 18(2):111–118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Fitzal F, Krois W, Trischler H, Wutzel L, Riedl O, Kuhbelbock U, Wintersteiner B, Cardoso MJ, Dubsky P, Gnant M, Jakesz R, Wild T (2007) The use of a breast symmetry index for objective evaluation of breast cosmesis. Breast 16(4):429–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Santos AC, Barros H, Cardoso de Oliveira M (2006) Interobserver agreement and consensus over the esthetic evaluation of conservative treatment for breast cancer. Breast 15(1):52–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Cardoso MJ, Cardoso JS, Wild T, Krois W, Fitzal F (2009) Comparing two objective methods for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast Cancer Res Treat 116(1):149–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Catanuto G, Spano A, Pennati A, Nava M (2009) Three-dimensional digital evaluation of breast symmetry after breast conservation therapy. J Am Coll Surg 208(1):166 author reply 166-167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Losken A, Fishman I, Denson DD, Moyer HR, Carlson GW (2005) An objective evaluation of breast symmetry and shape differences using 3-dimensional images. Ann Plast Surg 55(6):571–575PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Moyer HR, Carlson GW, Styblo TM, Losken A (2008) Three-dimensional digital evaluation of breast symmetry after breast conservation therapy. J Am Coll Surg 207(2):227–232PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Eder M, Waldenfels FV, Swobodnik A, Kloppel M, Pape AK, Schuster T, Raith S, Kitzler E, Papadopulos NA, Machens HG, Kovacs L (2011) Objective breast symmetry evaluation using 3-D surface imaging. Breast. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2011.07.016
  69. 69.
    Losken A, Seify H, Denson DD, Paredes AA Jr, Carlson GW (2005) Validating three-dimensional imaging of the breast. Ann Plast Surg 54(5):471–476 discussion 477-478PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    EORTC BCCG (2004) Manual for clinical research and treatment in breast cancer, 5th edn. Greenwich Medical Media, LondonGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Turesson I, Notter G (1984) The influence of fraction size in radiotherapy on the late normal tissue reaction–I: comparison of the effects of daily and once-a-week fractionation on human skin. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 10(5):593–598PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Turesson I, Notter G (1984) The influence of fraction size in radiotherapy on the late normal tissue reaction–II: comparison of the effects of daily and twice-a-week fractionation on human skin. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 10(5):599–606PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Barnett GC, Wilkinson JS, Moody AM, Wilson CB, Twyman N, Wishart GC, Burnet NG, Coles CE (2011) Randomized controlled trial of forward-planned intensity-modulated radiotherapy for early breast cancer: interim results at 2 years. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(2):715–723PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Al-Ghazal SK, Fallowfield L, Blamey RW (1999) Does cosmetic outcome from treatment of primary breast cancer influence psychosocial morbidity? Eur J Surg Oncol 25(6):571–573PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Christie D, Sharpley C, Curtis T (2005) Improving the accuracy of a photographic assessment system for breast cosmesis. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 17(1):27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Galdino GM, Swier P, Manson PN, Vander Kolk CA (2000) Converting to digital photography: a model for a large group or academic practice. Plast Reconstr Surg 106(1):119–124PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Galdino GM, Vogel JE, Vander Kolk CA (2001) Standardizing digital photography: it’s not all in the eye of the beholder. Plast Reconstr Surg 108(5):1334–1344PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Van Limbergen E, Rijnders A, van der Schueren E, Lerut T, Christiaens R (1989) Cosmetic evaluation of breast conserving treatment for mammary cancer. 2. A quantitative analysis of the influence of radiation dose, fractionation schedules and surgical treatment techniques on cosmetic results. Radiother Oncol 16(4):253–267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Catanuto G, Patete P, Spano A, Pennati A, Baroni G, Nava MB (2009) New technologies for the assessment of breast surgical outcomes. Aesthet Surg J 29(6):505–508PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Galdino GM, Nahabedian M, Chiaramonte M, Geng JZ, Klatsky S, Manson P (2002) Clinical applications of three-dimensional photography in breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 110(1):58–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kovacs L, Eder M, Papadopulos NA, Biemer E (2005) Validating 3-dimensional imaging of the breast. Ann Plast Surg 55(6):695–696PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Patete P, Riboldi M, Spadea MF, Catanuto G, Spano A, Nava M, Baroni G (2009) Motion compensation in hand-held laser scanning for surface modeling in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Ann Biomed Eng 37(9):1877–1885PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria João Cardoso
    • 1
  • Jaime Santos Cardoso
    • 2
  • Conny Vrieling
    • 3
  • Douglas Macmillan
    • 4
  • Dick Rainsbury
    • 5
  • Joerg Heil
    • 6
  • Eric Hau
    • 7
  • Mohammed Keshtgar
    • 8
  1. 1.Breast UnitChampalimaud Cancer CentreLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.INESC Porto Breast Research Group, Faculdade de EngenhariaUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal
  3. 3.Centre de Radio-oncologie des Eaux-VivesGeneveSwitzerland
  4. 4.Nottingham Breast Institute, Nottingham City HospitalNottinghamUK
  5. 5.Winchester and Andover Breast UnitWinchesterUK
  6. 6.Breast UnitUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  7. 7.Cancer Care CentreSt. George HospitalSidneyAustralia
  8. 8.Royal Free Hospital and University College London (UCL)LondonUK

Personalised recommendations