Dual plane breast augmentation: Optimizing implant-soft-tissue relationships in a wide range of breast types

被引:243
作者
Tebbetts, JB [1 ]
机构
[1] McGhan Med Corp, Dallas, TX USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/00006534-200104150-00027
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
In breast augmentation, surgeons usually choose a pocket location for the implant behind breast parenchyma (retromammary), partially behind the pectoralis major muscle (partial retropectoral), or totally behind pectoralis major and serratus (total submuscular). Each of these implant pocket locations has specific indications, but each also has a unique set of tradeoffs. When applied to a wide range of breast types, each pocket location has limitations. Glandular ptotic and constricted lower pole breasts offer unique challenges that often are not solved without tradeoffs when using a strictly retromammary partial retropectoral, or total submuscular pocket. This article describes specific indications and techniques for a dual plane approach to breast augmentation in several different breast types, introducing techniques that combine retromammary and partial retropectoral pocket locations in a single patient to optimize the benefits of each pocket location while limiting the tradeoffs and risks of a single pocket location. A total of 468 patients had dual plane augmentation between January of 1992 and March of 1998 using the specific techniques of dual plane augmentation described in this article. All patients were treated as outpatients and received general anesthesia. Indications. operative techniques, results, and complications for this series of patients are presented. Dual plane augmentation mammaplasty adjusts implant and tissue relationships to ensure adequate soft-tissue coverage while optimizing implant-soft-tissue dynamics to offer increased benefits and fewer tradeoffs compared with a single pocket location in a wide range of breast types.
引用
收藏
页码:1255 / 1272
页数:18
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
BIGGS TM, 1988, CLIN PLAST SURG, V15, P549
[2]   AUGMENTATION MAMMAPLASTY - A REVIEW OF 18 YEARS [J].
BIGGS, TM ;
CUKIER, J ;
WORTHING, LF .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1982, 69 (03) :445-450
[3]   AUGMENTATION MAMMAPLASTY - A COMPARATIVE-ANALYSIS [J].
BIGGS, TM ;
YARISH, RS .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1990, 85 (03) :368-372
[4]  
Cronin TD, 1964, T 3 INT C PLAST SURG, P41
[5]   SUBPECTORAL IMPLANTS IN AUGMENTATION MAMMAPLASTY - PRELIMINARY REPORT [J].
DEMPSEY, WC ;
LATHAM, WD .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1968, 42 (06) :515-&
[6]  
Griffiths CO, 1967, T 4 INT C PLAST SURG, P1009
[7]   THE RETROPECTORAL ROUTE FOR BREAST AUGMENTATION [J].
MAHLER, D ;
BENYAKAR, J ;
HAUBEN, DJ .
AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 1982, 6 (04) :237-242
[8]   RETROMAMMARY VERSUS RETROPECTORAL BREAST AUGMENTATION - A COMPARATIVE-STUDY [J].
MAHLER, D ;
HAUBEN, DJ .
ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 1982, 8 (05) :370-374
[9]   NO-TOUCH SUBMUSCULAR SALINE BREAST AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUE [J].
MLADICK, RA .
AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 1993, 17 (03) :183-192
[10]  
Papillon J, 1976, Clin Plast Surg, V3, P321