Advertisement

Prediction of Weight in Breast Reduction Surgery

  • Nicole Z. Sommer
  • Elvin G. Zook

Many studies showing the benefits of reduction mammaplasty have been reported; however, insurance companies have become more cost conscious and have made increasing efforts to deny this procedure. Spector and Karp [1] state that insurance companies often do not cover breast reductions that remove less than 1,000 g total (500 g of tissue from each side). However, their study shows that women who have less than 1,000 g of total weight removal, or even less than 750 g of totally removed, demonstrate “substantial relief of macromastia associated symptoms” and significant improvement in quality of life.

Seitchik and Schnur [2, 3] have recommended that the insurance companies base the minimum gram resection requirement on the patients weight and height rather than on an arbitrary number applied to all patients. Seitchik [2] found there was a correlation between body weight and a specimen weight of 0.68. He concluded that three levels of minimal volume resection should replace the one volume minimum. He proposed the weight resection correlations as follows: (1) Body weight less than 60 kg, 400 g resection. (2) Body weight 61–79 kg, 700 g resection. (3) Body weight >80 kg, 1,000 g resection. Schnur [3] gives percentiles of weight removal based on body surface area. The patient's body surface area, obtained by a graph of height and weight, determines the volume of breast tissue that must be removed to be above certain percentiles for all women having reductions. Below the fif h percentile is considered cosmetic, and above the 22nd percentile is considered medically necessary.

Keywords

Breast Tissue Breast Volume Breast Reduction Reduction Mammaplasty Breast Reduction Surgery 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Spector J, Karp N: Reduction mammaplasty: a significant improvement at any size. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;120(4):845–850CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Seitchik MW: Reduction mammaplasty: criteria for insurance coverage. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995;95(6):1029–1032CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schnur P, Schnur E, Petty PM, Hanson TJ, Weaver AL: Reduction mammaplasty: an outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997;100(4):875–883PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Becker H: Breast reduction insurance denials. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004;114(6):1687PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goldwyn RM: Breast reduction absurdum. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998;102(1):246CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schultz R, Dolezal R, Nolan J: Further application of Archimedes' principle in the correction of asymmetrical breasts. Ann Plast Surg 1986;16(2):98–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tezel E, Numanoglu A: Practical do-it-yourself device for accurate volume measurement of breast. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;105(3):1019–1023CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bouman F: Volumetric measurement of the human breast and breast tissue before and during mammaplasty. Br J Plast Surg 1970;23(3):263–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wilkie T, Ship A: Volumetric breast measurement during surgery. Aesth Plast Surg 1977;1:301–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tegtmeier R: A quick, accurate mammometer. Ann Plast Surg 1978;1(6):625–626CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Palin WE Jr, Fraunhofer J, Smith DJ Jr: Measurement of breast volume: comparison of techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 1986;77(2):253–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grossman A, Roudner L: A simple means for accurate breast volume determination. Plast Reconstr Surg 1980;66(6):851–852CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Campaigne BN, Katch VL, Freedson P, Sady S, Katch FI: Measurement of breast volume in females: description of a reliable method. Ann Human Biol 1979;6(4):363–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Edsander-Nord A, Wickman M, Jurell G: Measurement of breast volume with thermoplastic casts. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 1996;30(2):129–132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kanhai R, Hage J: Bra cup size depends on band size. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999;104(1):300PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Westreich M: Anthropomorphic breast measurement: protocol and results in 50 women with aesthetically perfect breasts and clinical application. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997;100(2):468–479CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sigurdson L, Kirkland S: Breast volume determination in breast hypertrophy: an accurate method using two anthropomorphic measurements. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;118(2):313–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Regnault P, Daniel RK: Breast reduction. In: Regnault P, Daniel K (eds), Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. Principles and Techniques. Boston, Little Brown 1984, pp 499–538Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Turner A, Dujon D: Predicting cup size after reduction mammaplasty. Br J Plast Surg 2005;58(3):290–298CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kalbhen C, McGill J, Fendley P, Corrigan K, Angelats J: Mammographic determination of breast volume: comparing different methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;173(6):1643–1649PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sheffer D, Price T, Loughry C, Bolyard B, Morek W, Varga R: Validity and reliability of biostereometric measurement of the human female breast. Ann Biomed Eng 1986;14(1):1–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Loughry C W, Sheffer DB, Price TE Jr, Lackney MJ, Bartfai RG, Morek WM: Breast volume measurements of 248 women using biostereometric analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 1987;80(4):553–558CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Loughry C W, Sheffer DB, Price TE, Einsporn RL, Bartfai RG, Morek WM, Meli NM: Breast volume measurement of 598 women using biostereometric analysis. Ann Plast Surg 1989;22(5):380–385CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Galdino G, Nahabedian M, Chiaramonte M, Geng J, Klatsky S, Manson P: Clinical applications of three-dimensional photography in breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002;110(1):58–70CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nahabedian M, Galdino G: Symmetrical breast reconstruction: is there a role for three-dimensional digital photography? Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;112(6):1582–1590CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Losken A, Seify H, Denson D, Pardes AA Jr, Carlson G: Validating three-dimensional imaging of the breast. Ann Plast Surg 2005;54(5):471–476CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nahabedian M: Discussion: validating three-dimensional imaging of the breast. Ann Plast Surg 2005;54(5):477–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kovacs L, Eder M, Papadopulos N, Biemer E: Validating 3-dimensional imaging of the breast. Ann Plast Surg 2005;55(6):695–696CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R, Zimmermann A, Settles M, Schneider A, Udosic K, Schwenzer-Zimmerer K, Papadopulos NA, Biemer E: New aspects of breast volume measurement using 3-dimensional surface imaging. Ann Plast Surg 2006;57(6):602–610CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bulstrode N, Bellamy E, Shrotria S: Breast volume assessment: comparing five different techniques. The Breast 2001;10(2):117–123CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R, Zimmermann A, Settles M, Schneider A, Endlich M, Schwenzer-Zimmerer K, Papadopulos NA, Biemer E: Comparison between breast volume measurement using 3D surface imaging and classical techniques. The Breast 2007;16(2):137–145CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Caruso MK, Guillot T, Nguyen T, Greenway F: The cost effectiveness of three different measures of breast volume. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2006;30(1):16–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sommer NZ, Zook EG, Verhulst SJ: The prediction of breast reduction weight. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002;109(2):506–511CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicole Z. Sommer
    • 1
  • Elvin G. Zook
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Plastic SurgerySouthern Illinois University School of MedicineSpringfieldUSA
  2. 2.Plastic Surgery InstituteSouthern Illinois University School of MedicineSpringfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations