The Double-Bubble Deformity

Handel, Neal

doi:10.1097/01.prs.0000434405.91316.96

Cited by 37 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We use 3D morphological changes in breast to answer the concerns about the possible increasing risk of palpable or visible implant inferiorly of dual-plane pocket [25], [26]. In our study, with dual-plane implant insertion, SN-N distance was relatively stable after post-1M, meanwhile N-IMF distance continuously increased until the relatively stable stage after post-6M.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…With reduced pressures from muscle and skin, implants could have more expansion by increasing the arc length from nipple to inframammary fold [2], [26]. Researchers also pointed out that anatomic implant give greater volume support for the lower breast [1], [26]. The sagittal slice in Figure 9 could also support the statements above.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…However, our data showed different volumetric distribution with the postoperative average of 41.6% in upper pole and 58.4% in the lower (Table 3 and Figure 7). Handel stated that the dual plane releases constriction of pectoralis muscle and facilitates redistribution of the tight skin of the lower pole to accommodate the implant [26]. With reduced pressures from muscle and skin, implants could have more expansion by increasing the arc length from nipple to inframammary fold [2], [26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Handel stated that the dual plane releases constriction of pectoralis muscle and facilitates redistribution of the tight skin of the lower pole to accommodate the implant [26]. With reduced pressures from muscle and skin, implants could have more expansion by increasing the arc length from nipple to inframammary fold [2], [26]. Researchers also pointed out that anatomic implant give greater volume support for the lower breast [1], [26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Prospective Study of Breast Dynamic Morphological Changes after Dual-plane Augmentation Mammaplasty with 3D Scanning Technique

Luan

Liu

et al. 2014

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe dual-plane technique has been widely used in augmentation mammaplasty procedures. However, there are some concerns about aesthetic contour maintenance for long time after muscle releasing. This study aims to track and analyze breast dynamic morphological changes after dual-plane breast augmentation with three-dimensional (3D) scanning technique.MethodsThirteen dual-plane anatomic implant augmentation patients underwent 3D scanning preoperatively (pre-OP) and postoperatively in four time points (1 month: post-1M, 3 months: post-3M, 6 months: post-6M and 12 months: post-12M). The linear distance, breast projection, nipple position, breast volume and breast surface area were measured and analyzed on the 3D models over time.ResultsCompared with post-12M, no significant differences were found in distances of nipple to midline, nipple to inframammary fold and sternal notch to the level of inframammary fold after 6 months in both straight-line distance and its projection on surface. The distances between sternal notch and nipple had no significant difference after post-1M. Breast volume changes had no significant difference after post-3M. The volume and area percentage of upper pole decreased while the lower pole’s increased gradually. The surface showed no significant changes after post-1M. The changes of breast projection had no significance after post-1M either. The nipple moved 1.0±0.6 cm laterally(X axis), 0.6±0.7 cm upward(Y axis) and 2.3±1.1 cm anteriorly (Z axis) at post-12M, and the differences were not significant after post-1M.Conclusions3D scanning technique provides an objective and effective way to evaluate breast morphological changes after augmentation mammaplasty over time. Dual-plane augmentation optimizes breast shape especially in the lower pole and maintains stable aesthetic outcome during the 12 months follow-up. Most of the contour changes and the interadaptation with the implant have completed 6 months after operation. Therefore, 6 months could be chosen as a relatively stable observing period in the assessment of postoperative outcomes of dual-plane breast augmentation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Prospective Study of Breast Dynamic Morphological Changes after Dual-plane Augmentation Mammaplasty with 3D Scanning Technique

Luan

Liu

et al. 2014

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The double-bubble deformity has received attention recently in the plastic surgery literature. 1 , 2 , 5 – 12 This deformity is characterized by a second crease running across the lower pole of the breast. 5 Both bottoming out and the double-bubble deformity may result from a dissection inferior to the existing IMF.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%