The Kinematics of Breasts Implanted With a Reduced Mass Implant: A Pilot Study

Abstract

Background Breast implants may increase breast skin tension and interact with surrounding tissues to alter breast position and motion during dynamic activity. Reducing implant mass and changing implant location (submuscular/subglandular) may also affect breast kinematics and the subsequent loads on breast structures. Objectives The aim of this pilot study was to describe the kinematics of breasts augmented with reduced-mass implants during standing, walking, and running, compared with natural breasts, and to provide insight into how implant location (submuscular/subglandular) alters breast kinematics. Methods Two breast augmentation participants (12–15 months postsurgery: 32AA presurgery, anatomical submuscular 255 cc B-Lite reduced-mass implant; 32A presurgery, anatomical subglandular 285 cc B-Lite reduced-mass implant) and 2 natural-breasted participants of similar breast size and anthropometrics were recruited. Nipple and torso positional data were recorded with electromagnetic sensors during standing, walking, and running. Nipple kinematics relative to the torso were calculated. Results The B-Lite participants both displayed greater nipple projection and elevation during standing and a 50% reduction in nipple acceleration during walking, when compared with their natural counterparts. During running, the B-Lite subglandular participant displayed decreased nipple kinematics compared with her natural counterpart and lower nipple kinematics compared with the B-Lite submuscular participant during walking and running. Conclusions A combination of implant location (subglandular) and reduced mass minimized nipple kinematics during running. Reducing nipple kinematics during dynamic activity may decrease the loading on breast structures, helping to decrease ptosis and increase the longevity of procedure outcomes. Level of Evidence: 4

Effects of ventilation design on thermal comfort performance and breast displacement for sports bras

“…According to previous research, 10,23,61 the sports bra with (significantly) lower values in T s and H s at all or most of the five time points was considered to be (significantly) better in thermal comfort performance than other sports bras. In addition, the average value of T s and H s of five time points was also compared if there was no significant difference between two sports bras at any time point.…”

“…The differences of T c between these four sports bras were relatively small but physiologically meaningful from a heat balance and thermal comfort perspective as a fever or hyperthermia could be caused by these small differences. 61…”

How the characteristics of sports bras affect their performance

“…Briefly, the proximal end of the segment was the midpoint between the suprasternal notch and C7 sensors, and the distal end of the segment was the midpoint between the xiphoid process and T8 sensors. Gait cycles were identified using every other inferior minima of the suprasternal notch sensor (Norris et al 2019) and the first ten gait cycles within the 30 s data collection period were utilised for analyses.…”

“…To quantify breast movement, nipple position was calculated relative to the local coordinate system of the torso in three directions: superior-inferior (S-I), anterior-posterior (A-P) and medial-lateral (M-L) (Norris et al 2019). Nipple ROM was calculated within each gait cycle as the maximum displacement A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t minus the minimum displacement for each axis (cm) which was then averaged across the ten gait cycles to provide representative breast movement during running.…”

Five-Year Safety and Satisfaction With the Lightweight Breast Implant

“…This reduced loading on breast structures may help to decrease ptosis and increase the longevity of procedure outcomes. 12 …”