Transareolar-Perinipple Dual Pockets Breast Augmentation.
- Author:
Paik Kwon LEE
1
;
Jee Hoon KIM
;
Byung Chul SEO
;
Deuk Young OH
;
Jong Won RHIE
;
Sang Tae AHN
Author Information
1. Department of Plastic Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. pklee@catholic.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Dual pockets breast augmentation;
Transareolar- perinipple incision
- MeSH:
Asian Continental Ancestry Group;
Asymptomatic Infections;
Breast Feeding;
Breast*;
Cicatrix;
Contracture;
Deception;
Endoscopes;
Female;
Fingers;
Follow-Up Studies;
Hematoma;
Hemorrhage;
Hernia;
Humans;
Intercostal Nerves;
Nipples;
Pain, Postoperative;
Sensation;
Skin;
Tattooing
- From:Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons
2007;34(1):93-98
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Many options are available for the incision and pocket selection in breast augmentation. Each method has its advantages and disadvantages. To leave an invisible operation scar and to achieve easier pocket dissection by the central location of the incision on the breast, we made a transareolar-perinipple incision. To overcome the disadvantages of the transareolar incision, originally advocated by Pitanguy in 1973, we modified the direction of incision line and dissection plane. METHODS: To avoid the injury of 4th intercostal nerve responsible for nipple sensation, we made perinipple incision on the medial side of the nipple instead of trans-nipple incision and made the transareolar incision as 11-5 o'clock on the left side and 1-7 o'clock on the right side instead of 3-9 o'clock on both sides. To avoid the possible infection and breast feeding problem caused by the injury to the lactiferous duct, and the possible implant hernia caused by the incisions lying on a same plane of pocket dissection, we made a subcutaneous dissection just above the breast tissue medially down to the bottom of breast tissue and made a subglandular or subfascial pocket, which may avoid the injury of lactiferous duct and create different planes for skin incision and pocket dissection. Other advantages of the transareolar-perinipple incision include easier pocket dissection, less chance of hematoma, and as a result less postoperative pain because of the central location of the approach which allow finger dissection and meticulous bleeding control with direct vision, without any specialized instrument such as an endoscope or long mammary dissectors. As for pocket selection, we made dual pockets. We prefer subglandular or subfascial pocket. Also, we made a subpectoral pocket in the upper 1/4 of the pocket to add more volume on the upper part of the augmented breast, which can make aesthetically more desirable breasts in thin Asian women with small breasts. Possible disadvantages of our method are subclinical infection and scar widening, which could be overcome by meticulous operation techniques, antibiotic therapy, and intradermal tattooing. RESULTS: From September, 2003 to August, 2005, 12 patients underwent breast augmentation using round smooth surface saline implants by our method. During the mean follow-up period of 13 months, there were no complications such as infection, hematoma, capsular contracture, and sensory change of nipple, and results were satisfactory. CONCLUSION: We suggest breast augmentation via transareolar-perinipple incision and dual pockets(subpectoral-subglandular or subfascial) as a valuable method in thin oriental women with small breasts.
