Selection of breast pocket using the pinch test in augmentation mammoplasty: Can it be relied on in the long term?

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 780-781

  Khan, Umar Daraz ^a  

^a Belvedere Private Hospital   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGING; BREAST AUGMENTATION; BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; IMPLANT; LETTER; MAMMARY GLAND; PREGNANCY; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS; WEIGHT REDUCTION;

BREAST; BREAST IMPLANTS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MAMMAPLASTY; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 70349652200     PISSN: 0364216X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-009-9315-2     Document Type: Letter

References (7)

1. Last RJ (1978) Anatomy regional and applied, 6th edn. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 65-66
2. Cronin TD, Gerow RM (1964) Augmentation mammoplasty: new "natural feel" prosthesis. In translation of the third international congress of the plastic surgery, Amsterdam, Excerpta Medica, pp 41-49, Excerpta Medica International Congress Series no. 66
3. JB Tebbet 2002 A system for breast implant selection based on patient tissue characteristics and implant-soft tissue dynamics Plast Reconstruct Surg 109 1396 1409 10.1097/00006534-200204010-00030
4. UD Khan 2007 Muscle-splitting biplane breast augmentation Aesth Plast Surg 31 353 358
5. H Becker JB Storm van Leeuwen 1990 The correction of breast ptosis with expander mammary prosthesis Ann Plast Surg 24 489 497 2363561 10.1097/00000637-199006000-00004 1:STN:280:DyaK3czgt12nsQ%3D%3D (Pubitemid 20302644)
6. SL Spears JW Little III 1988 Breast capsulorraphy Plast Reconstr Surg 81 274 279
7. RM Graf A Bernardes R Rippel LR Araujo RC Damasio A Auersvald 2003 Subfascial breast implant: a new procedure Plast Reconstr Surg 111 904 12560720 10.1097/01.PRS.0000041601.59651.15 (Pubitemid 36182351)