3D analysis of breast augmentation defines operative changes and their relationship to implant dimensions

Annals of Plastic Surgery

Volumn 62, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 570-575

  Tepper, Oren M ^a   Small, Kevin H ^a   Unger, Jacob G ^a   Feldman, Daniel L ^a   Kumar, Naveen ^a   Choi, Mihye ^a   Karp, Nolan S ^a,b  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

3D imaging; 3D photography; Breast augmentation; Breast implant; Mammometrics; Saline implant; Silicone implant

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST AUGMENTATION; BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MORPHOLOGY; NIPPLE; PARAMETER; PHOTOGRAPHY; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VOLUMETRY; BREAST; BREAST ENDOPROSTHESIS; HISTOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; ORGAN SIZE;

SILICONE GEL;

ADULT; BREAST; BREAST IMPLANTATION; BREAST IMPLANTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MAMMAPLASTY; MIDDLE AGED; ORGAN SIZE; PHOTOGRAPHY; SILICONE GELS;

EID: 67449156059     PISSN: 01487043     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31819faff9     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. BeekmanWH, Hage JJ, Jorna LB, Mulder JW. Augmentation mammaplasty: the story before the silicone bag prosthesis. Ann Plast Surg. 1999;43:446-451.
2. Handbook of Plastic Surgery. Greer SE, et al, eds. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2004.
3. Hölmich LR, Breiting VB, Fryzek JP, et al. Long-term cosmetic outcome after breast implantation. Ann Plast Surg. 2007;59:597-604.
4. Stokes RB. Breast augmentation in thin women: patient satisfaction with saline-filled implants. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2004;28:153-157. [Epub 2004 Aug 3].
5. Banbury J, Yetman R, Lucas A, et al. Prospective analysis of the outcome of subpectoral breast augmentation: sensory changes, muscle function, and body image. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113:701-707; discussion 708-711. (Pubitemid 39201947)
6. Isogai N, Sai K, Kamiishi H, et al. Quantitative analysis of the reconstructed breast using a 3-dimensional laser light scanner. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;56:237.
7. Losken A, Seify H, Denson DD, et al. Validating three-dimensional imaging of the breast. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;54:471-478.
8. Tepper OM, Small K, Rudolph L, et al. Virtual 3-dimensional modeling as a valuable adjunct to aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery. Am J Surg. 2006;192:548-551. (Pubitemid 44344184)
9. Tepper OM, Choi M, Small K, et al. An innovative three-dimensional approach to defining the anatomical changes occurring after short scar-medial pedicle reduction mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:1875-2185
10. Matarasso A, Elias AC, Elias RL. Labial incompetence: a marker for progressive bone resorption in silastic chinaugmentation: an update. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;112:676-678; discussion 679-680. (Pubitemid 36951471)
11. Tebbetts JB. A system for breast implant selection based on patient tissue characteristics and implant-soft tissue dynamics. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109:1396 -1409; discussion 1410-1415.
12. Adams WP. The High Five Process: tissue-based planning for breast augmentation. Plast Surg Nurs. 2007;27:197-201.