Correction to: New aspects in digital breast assessment: further refinement of a method for automated digital anthropometry

Hartmann, Robin; Weiherer, Maximilian; Schiltz, Daniel; Baringer, Magnus; Noisser, Vivien; Hösl, Vanessa; Eigenberger, Andreas; Seitz, Stephan; Palm, Christoph; Prantl, Lukas; Brébant, Vanessa

doi:10.1007/s00404-021-06275-5

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The system is supplied with Vectra Ò Breast-Sculptor TM (Canfield Scientific, USA) software for point cloud processing and mesh generation. This application allows analysis of the 3D model in terms of breast volume and various breast dimensions, as previously demonstrated in a number of studies [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]. Thus, 13 points were marked on the patient and subsequently selected in Breast-Sculptor TM (see Fig.…”

Section: Objective Outcome Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implants Versus Lipograft: Analysis of Long-Term Results Following Congenital Breast Asymmetry Correction

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims Congenital breast asymmetry represents a particular challenge to the classic techniques of plastic surgery given the young age of patients at presentation. This study reviews and compares the long-term results of traditional breast augmentation using silicone implants and the more innovative technique of lipografting. Methods To achieve this, we not only captured subjective parameters such as satisfaction with outcome and symmetry, but also objective parameters including breast volume and anthropometric measurements. The objective examination was performed manually and by using the Vectra® H2 photogrammetry scanning system. Results Differences between patients undergoing either implant augmentation or lipograft were revealed not to be significant with respect to patient satisfaction with surgical outcome (p = 0.55) and symmetry (p = 0.69). Furthermore, a breast symmetry of 93 % was reported in both groups. Likewise, no statistically significant volume difference between the left and right breasts was observed in both groups (p < 0.41). However, lipograft patients needed on average 2.9 procedures to achieve the desired result, compared with 1.3 for implant augmentation. In contrast, patients treated with implant augmentation may require a number of implant changes during their lifetime. Conclusion Both methods may be considered for patients presenting with congenital breast asymmetry. Level of Evidence III This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

show abstract