Advertisement

Intraoperative Assessment of Breast Prosthesis Volume Using a Set of Graduated Expanders

  • Melvin A. Shiffman
  • Beniamino Palmieri
  • Pierangelo Bosio

Abstract

One of the most puzzling decisions in augmentation mammaplasty for aesthetic purposes or following mammary gland removal is related to adequacy of the volume of the prosthesis to be inserted. Most surgeons use a graduated gauge to measure the surface between the inframammary groove, the supramammary margin, the costoclavicular line, and the anterior axillary line. After determining the ideal space for the creation of a suitable pocket in which the prosthesis will be placed, the inflatable models of the prostheses are bilaterally inserted. The author suggests doing realistic intraoperative measurements of prosthetic size and shape. This “phantom” implant planning is a practical aid to appropriately and consistently select the final breast conformation in augmentation mammaplasty.

Keywords

Breast Augmentation Ideal Space Anterior Axillary Line Augmentation Mammaplasty Aesthetic Purpose 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bouman FG: Volumetric measurement of the human breast and breast tissue before and during mammaplasty. Br J Plast Surg 1970;23(3):263–264PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Kirianoff TG: Volume measurements of unequal breasts. Plast Reconstr Surg 1974;54(5):616PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Snyder GB: Planning on augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1974;54(2):312–341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ellenbogen R: A new device to assist in sizing breasts. Ann Plast Surg 1978;1(3):333–335PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Tegtmeier RE: A quick, accurate mammometer. Ann Plast Surg 1978;1(6):625–626PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Tegtmeier RE: A convenient, effective mammary sizer. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1979;3:227–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ramselaar JM: Precision in breast reduction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1988;82(4):631–643PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Godfrey PM, Godfrey NV, Romita MC: Restoring the breast to match the normal side. Ann Plast Surg 1993;31(5):392–397PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edsander-Nord A, Wickman M, Jurell G: Measurement of breast volume with thermoplastic casts. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 1996;30(2):129–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hamas RS: The comparative dimensions of round and anatomic saline-filled implants. J Aesthetic Surg 2000;20:281–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brody G: Breast implant size selection and patient satisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1981;68(4):611–613PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Tezel E, Numanoglu A: Practical do-it-yourself device for accurate volume measurement of the breast. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;105(3):1019–1023PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pechter EA: A new method to determinate bra size and predicting postaugmentation breast size. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998;102(4):1259–1265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Young VL, Nemecek JR, Nemecek DA: The efficacy of breast augmentation: breast size increase, patient satisfaction, and psychological effects. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;94(7):958–969PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Young VL: The efficacy of breast augmentation: breast size increase, patient satisfaction, and psychological effects. (Response) Plast Reconstr Surg 1995;96:1237–1238CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Melvin A. Shiffman
    • 1
  • Beniamino Palmieri
    • 2
  • Pierangelo Bosio
    • 3
  1. 1.Section of SurgeryTustin Hospital and Medical CenterTustinUSA
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Modena Medical School and Reggio EmiliaModenaItaly
  3. 3.Department of General Surgery, Policlinico Di ModenaUniversity of Modena Medical SchoolModenaItaly

Personalised recommendations