Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metrics of the Aesthetically Perfect Breast

  • Original Article
  • Breast Surgery
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 25 September 2018

This article has been updated

Abstract

Breast surgery has long been viewed as an art more than a science. However, defining and objectively measuring the ideal breast morphology and aesthetic proportions are fundamental for surgical planning and to setting the goals of surgery as well as to evaluate surgical outcomes. Despite the fact that much has been written about aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery, there is still no real consensus about what the attributes are of an ideal breast. Moreover, there are in fact no objective standard measurement systems and guidelines to describe ideal or even normal breast shape. Though there is great variability in the perception of beauty among patients and surgeons alike due to many factors among which are age, sex, and sociocultural background, there is common agreement that beauty is a universal phenomenon that has a universal standard present across all civilizations and centuries, and that perceived beauty is enhanced and optimal aesthetics are achieved when proper measurements are made and anthropometric proportions as well as attractive harmonious ratios are respected. The current review is an attempt to summarize the most relevant information available trying to introduce some harmony in our perception of aesthetic ideals of breast surgery.

Level of Evidence V 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

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

Change history

  • 25 September 2018

    Bishara Atiyeh’s name was misspelled in this article. It appears correctly here.

References

  1. Hall-Findlay EJ (2010) The three breast dimensions: analysis and effecting change. Plast Reconstr Surg 125:1632

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Mallucci P, Branford OA (2012) Concepts in aesthetic breast dimensions: analysis of the ideal breast. J Plast Reconstr Aesth Surg 65:8e16

    Google Scholar 

  3. Broer PN, Juran S, Walker ME, Ng R, Weichman K, Tanna N, Liu YJ, Shah A, Patel A, Persing JA, Thomson JG (2015) Aesthetic breast shape preferences among plastic surgeons. Ann Plast Surg 74(6):639–644

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Atiyeh BS, Hayek SN (2008) Numeric expression of aesthetics and beauty. Aesth Plast Surg. 32:209–216

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fantozzi F (2013) Applications of anthropometry in torsoplastic surgery. Eur J Plast Surg 36:519–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Schwarz G, Zins J (2011) Correlation of pluralistic aesthetic evaluation with objective measurements. Ann Plast Surg 67(1):12–13

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Adamson AA, Zavod MB (2006) Changing perceptions of beauty: a surgeon’s perspective. Facial Plast Surg 22:188–193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hwang K, Park JY, Hwang SW (2015) A consideration of breast imagery in art as depicted through western painting. Arch Plast Surg 42(2):226–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Swami V, Tovée MJ (2007) Perceptions of female body weight and shape among indigenous and urban Europeans. Scand J Psychol 48:43–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Voracek M, Fisher ML (2002) Shapely centrefolds? Temporal change in body measures: trend analysis. Br Med J 325:1447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dixson BJ, Duncan M, Dixson AF (2015) The role of breast size and areolar pigmentation in perceptions of women’s sexual attractiveness, reproductive health, sexual maturity, maternal nurturing abilities, and age. Arch Sex Behav 44(6):1685–1695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Westreich M (1997) Anthropomorphic breast measurement: protocol and results in 50 women with aesthetically perfect breasts and clinical application. Plast Reconstr Surg 100:468

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Swanson E (2017) A measurement system and ideal breast shape. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Swanson E (2012) A measurement system for evaluation of shape changes and proportions after cosmetic breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 129:982–992 (discussion 993)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Avşar DK, Aygit AC, Benlier E, Top H, Taşkinalp O (2010) Anthropometric breast measurement: a study of 385 Turkish female students. Aesthet Surg J. 30(1):44–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Brody GS (2003) The perfect breast: Is it attainable? Does it exist? Plast Reconstr Surg 113(5):1500–1503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Liu YJ, Thomson J (2011) Ideal anthropomorphic values of the female breast correlation of pluralistic aesthetic evaluations with objective measurements. Ann Plast Surg 67:7–11

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Martinovic ME, Blanchet NP (2017) BFACE: a framework for evaluating breast aesthetics. Plast Reconstr Surg 140(2):287e–295e

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sheldon WH, Stevens SS, Tucker WB (1940) The varieties of human physique. Harper, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. del Yerro J, Martin L, Vegas MR, Fernandez V, Moreno E, Sanz I, Puga S, Vecino MG, Biggs T (2013) Selecting the implant height in breast augmentation with anatomical prosthesis: the “Number Y”. Plast Reconstr Surg 131:1404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Penn J (1955) Breast reduction. Br J Plast Surg 7:357e–371e

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Atiyeh B, Dibo S (2014) Preoperative assessment tool for planning of inframammary incision and implant profile in breast augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 38(5):878–886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Atiyeh B, Ibrahim A, Saba S, Karamanoukian R, Chahine F, Papazian N (2017) The infra-mammary fold (IMF): a poorly appreciated landmark in prosthetic/alloplastic breast aesthetic and reconstructive surgery—personal experience. Aesthet Plast Surg 41(4):806–814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Regnault P (1976) Breast ptosis. Clin Plast Surg 3:193–203

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Serra-Mestre JM, Fernandez Peñuela R, Foti V, D’Andrea F, Serra-Renom JM (2017) Breast cleavage remodeling with fat grafting: a safe way to optimize symmetry and to reduce intermammary distance. Plast Reconstr Surg 140(5):665e–672e

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Lassus C (1999) Update on vertical mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 104(7):2289–2298

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Brown TP, Ringrose C, Hyland RE et al (1999) A method of as- sessing female breast morphometry and its clinical application. Br J Plast Surg 52:355–359

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lewin R, Amoroso M, Plate N, Trogen C, Selvaggi G (2016) The aesthetically ideal position of the nipple–areola complex on the breast. Aesthet Plast Surg 40(5):724–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Khan HA, Bayat A (2008) A geometric method for nipple localization. Can J Plast Surg 16(1):45–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tebbetts JB (2013) A process for quantifying aesthetic and functional breast surgery: I. Quantifying optimal nipple position and vertical and horizontal skin excess for mastopexy and breast reduction. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:65–73

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hauben DJ, Adler N, Silfen R, Regev D (2003) Breast–areola–nipple proportion. Ann Plast Surg 50(5):510–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Broer PN, Juran S, Walker ME, Ng R, Weichman K, Tanna N, Liu YJ, Shah A, Patel A, Persing JA, Thomson JG (2015) Aesthetic breast shape preferences among plastic surgeons. Ann Plast Surg 74(6):639–644

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Sharif SP (2017) Development and psychometric evaluation of the breast size satisfaction scale. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 30(8):717–727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Prantl L, Gründl M (2011) Males prefer a larger bust size in women than females themselves: an experimental study on female bodily attractiveness with varying weight, bust size, waist width, hip width, and leg length independently. Aesthet Plast Surg 35(5):693–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Raposio E, Belgrano V, Santi PL, Chiorri C (2016) Which is the ideal breast size? Some social clues for plastic surgeons. Ann Plast Surg 76:340–345

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Barber N (1998) Secular changes in standards of bodily attractiveness in American women: different masculine and feminine ideals. J Psychol 132:87–94

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Zelazniewicz AM, Pawlowski B (2011) Female breast size attractiveness for men as a function of sociosexual orientation (restricted versus unrestricted). Arch Sex Behav 40(6):1129–1135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Yang J, Zhang R, Shen J, Hu Y, Lv Q (2015) The three-dimensional techniques in the objective measurement of breast aesthetics. Aesthet Plast Surg 39(6):910–915

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kim H, Mun GH, Wiraatmadja ES, Lim SY, Pyon JK, Oh KS, Lee JE, Nam SJ, Bang SI (2015) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging-based breast volumetry for immediate breast reconstruction. Aesthet Plast Surg 39(3):369–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Hwang K, Park JY, Hwang SW (2015) a consideration of breast imagery in art as depicted through western painting. Arch Plast Surg 42(2):226–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hsia HC, Thomson JG (2003) Differences in breast shape preferences between plastic surgeons and patients seeking breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 112(1):312–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Xi W, Perdanasari AT, Ong Y, Han S, Min P, Su W, Feng S, Pacchioni L, Zhang YX, Lazzeri D (2014) Objective breast volume, shape and surface area assessment: a systematic review of breast measurement methods. Aesthet Plast Surg 38(6):1116–1130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Patel N (2008) Discussion: numeric expression of aesthetics and beauty. Aesthet Plast Surg 32:217–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Qiao Q, Zhou G, Ling Y (1997) Breast volume measurement in young Chinese women and clinical applications. Aesthet Plast Surg 21:362–368

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Sigurdson LJ, Kirkland SA (2006) Breast volume determination in breast hypertrophy: an accurate method using two anthropomorphic measurements. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:313–320

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Longo B, Farcomeni A, Ferri G, Campanale A, Sorotos M, Santanelli F (2013) The BREAST-V: a unifying predictive formula for volume assessment in small, medium, and large breasts. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:1e

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon

    Bishara Atiye & Fadel Chahine

Authors
  1. Bishara Atiye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fadel Chahine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fadel Chahine.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Atiye, B., Chahine, F. Metrics of the Aesthetically Perfect Breast. Aesth Plast Surg 42, 1187–1194 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1154-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1154-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation