Skip to main content
Log in

Patient Expectations After Breast Augmentation: The Imperative to Audit Your Sizing System

  • Original Article
  • Experimental/Special Topics
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Patient dissatisfaction with breast size after breast implant surgery can lead to early secondary procedures in a minority of cases. Different systems of sizing a patient preoperatively have been proposed, including detailed measurements and computer-assisted assessment. Whatever system is used, a surgeon needs to obtain feedback to ascertain that the system is effective at producing a satisfactory outcome. In this study, 137 patients who underwent breast augmentation by a single surgeon were prospectively assessed for a 12-week period after surgery to determine their satisfaction with their breast size. Both expectations and desire to change implant size were assessed. Early (week 1) expectations of the patients were a good predictor of their long-term assessment 12 weeks after surgery and their desire to change their implant size. The patients with a greater body mass index (BMI) and larger implant volume were more likely to express a desire for a change in implant size early in the postoperative course. The findings showed that 19.4 % (26/134) of the patients wished to have larger implants by 12 weeks after surgery and that 3.7 % (5/134) felt smaller implants would be preferable. The information produced by this audit is important to the provision of future informed consent for this surgeon. Without similar data from their individual practices, surgeons cannot provide patients with an accurate assessment of their satisfaction after breast augmentation surgery. A similar undertaking is strongly recommended for surgeons performing breast implant surgery.

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 www.springer.com/00266.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brown T (2012) Subfascial breast augmentation: is there any advantage over the submammary plane? Aesthetic Plast Surg 36:566–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Choudry U, Kim N (2012) Preoperative assessment preferences and reported reoperation rates for size change in primary breast augmentation: a survey of ASPS members. Plast Reconstr Surg 130:1352–1359

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Dionyssiou DD, Demiri EC, Davison JA (2005) A simple method for determining the breast implant size in augmentation mammaplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 229:571–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gladilin E, Gabrielova B, Montemurro P, Heden P (2001) Customized planning of augmentation mammoplasty with silicone implants using three-dimensional optical body scans and biochemical modelling of soft tissue outcomes. Aesthetic Plast Surg 35:494–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gore SM, Lamberty BG (2011) PERTHESE: implant-identical cohesive-gel sizers in breast augmentation: a prospective report on 200 consecutive cases and implication for treatment of breast asymmetry. Aesthetic Surg J 31:914–924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hidalgo DA, Spector JA (2010) Preoperative sizing in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 125:1781–1787

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hidalgo DA, Spectator JA (2011) Reply: bra stuffing for implant sizing? Satisfaction? Who, when, and compared to what? Plast Reconstr Surg 127:1002–1003

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Karabulut AB, Ozden BC, Arinci A (2008) A nomogram for predicting the degree of breast augmentation according to implant size. Aesthetic Plast Surg 32:289–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pereira LH, Stereodimas A (2007) A definite size of the augmented breast could be up to a breast cup smaller than the early postoperative size. Aesthetic Plast Surg 31:759

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tebetts JB, Adams WP (2005) Five critical decisions in breast augmentation using five measurements in 5 minutes: the high-five decision support process. Plast Reconstr Surg 116:2005–2016

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tebetts JB (2011) Bra stuffing for implant sizing? Satisfaction? Who, when, and compared to what? Plast Reconstr Surg 127:1001–1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Jamie Moore for his invaluable assistance with the statistical analysis in this report.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tim Brown.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brown, T. Patient Expectations After Breast Augmentation: The Imperative to Audit Your Sizing System. Aesth Plast Surg 37, 1134–1139 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-013-0214-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-013-0214-1

Keywords

Navigation