Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 3/2019

01-06-2019 | Breast Augmentation | Original Article

Endoscopic Transaxillary Versus Inframammary Approaches for Breast Augmentation Using Shaped Implants: A Matched Case–Control Study

Authors: Dong Won Lee, Soo Jung Kim, Hanjo Kim

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The incision for breast augmentation can be chosen from the transaxillary, inframammary fold, periareolar, or transumbilical approaches. While the inframammary fold approach is commonly used worldwide, the transaxillary approach is more popular in Asia due to the more conservative location of the scar. In this study, we performed augmentation mammoplasty using anatomically shaped implants via the endoscopic transaxillary and inframammary fold incisions and compared the outcomes.

Methods

Three hundred sixty-four patients who underwent breast augmentation with shaped implants were enrolled. All were primary and bilateral cases. In total, 728 shaped implants were used. Patients’ demographics, incision type, and complications were documented. Complications such as capsular contracture, hematoma, infection, implant malposition, wound problem, and chronic seroma were observed during the average 27 months of follow-up period and analyzed.

Results

One hundred ninety-five patients underwent augmentation mammoplasty via the inframammary approach, whereas 169 patients underwent the endoscopic transaxillary approach. Implant type and size were matched between the two groups. Complication rates were 1.8% and 2.7% in the inframammary and transaxillary approach, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two approaches in terms of surgical complications (p = 0.593).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that the endoscopic transaxillary approach is not inferior to the inframammary approach when shaped implants are used for augmentation mammoplasty. Therefore, the transaxillary approach may be an alternative method when using shaped implants for augmentation mammoplasty, especially for women who wish to avoid a visible scar on the inframammary fold.

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.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Heidekrueger PI, Sinno S, Hidalgo DA, Colombo M, Broer PN (2018) Current trends in breast augmentation: an international analysis. Aesthet Surg J 38:133–148CrossRefPubMed Heidekrueger PI, Sinno S, Hidalgo DA, Colombo M, Broer PN (2018) Current trends in breast augmentation: an international analysis. Aesthet Surg J 38:133–148CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Stutman RL, Codner M, Mahoney A, Amei A (2012) Comparison of breast augmentation incisions and common complications. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:1096–1104CrossRef Stutman RL, Codner M, Mahoney A, Amei A (2012) Comparison of breast augmentation incisions and common complications. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:1096–1104CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Somogyi RB, Brown MH (2015) Outcomes in primary breast augmentation: a single surgeon’s review of 1539 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:87–97CrossRefPubMed Somogyi RB, Brown MH (2015) Outcomes in primary breast augmentation: a single surgeon’s review of 1539 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:87–97CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Ince B, Dadaci M, Oltulu P, Altuntas Z, Bilgen F (2015) Effect of dermal thickness on scars in women with type III–IV Fitzpatrick skin. Aesthet Plast Surg 39:318–324CrossRef Ince B, Dadaci M, Oltulu P, Altuntas Z, Bilgen F (2015) Effect of dermal thickness on scars in women with type III–IV Fitzpatrick skin. Aesthet Plast Surg 39:318–324CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Schwartz MR (2014) Algorithm and techniques for using Sientra’s silicone gel shaped implants in primary and revision breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 134:18S–27SCrossRefPubMed Schwartz MR (2014) Algorithm and techniques for using Sientra’s silicone gel shaped implants in primary and revision breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 134:18S–27SCrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Sim HB, Sun SH (2015) Transaxillary endoscopic breast augmentation with shaped gel implants. Aesthet Surg J 35:952–961CrossRefPubMed Sim HB, Sun SH (2015) Transaxillary endoscopic breast augmentation with shaped gel implants. Aesthet Surg J 35:952–961CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Adams WP Jr, Culbertson EJ, Deva AK, Magnusson M, Layt C, Jewell ML, Mallucci P, Hedén P (2017) Macrotextured breast implants with defined steps to minimize bacterial contamination around the device: experience in 42,000 implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:427–431CrossRefPubMed Adams WP Jr, Culbertson EJ, Deva AK, Magnusson M, Layt C, Jewell ML, Mallucci P, Hedén P (2017) Macrotextured breast implants with defined steps to minimize bacterial contamination around the device: experience in 42,000 implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:427–431CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Hidalgo DA, Sinno S (2016) Current trends and controversies in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:1142–1150CrossRefPubMed Hidalgo DA, Sinno S (2016) Current trends and controversies in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:1142–1150CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Chong SJ, Deva AK (2015) Understanding the etiology and prevention of capsular contracture: translating science into practice. Clin Plast Surg 42:427–436CrossRefPubMed Chong SJ, Deva AK (2015) Understanding the etiology and prevention of capsular contracture: translating science into practice. Clin Plast Surg 42:427–436CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Maxwell GP, Van Natta BW, Bengtson BP, Murphy DK (2015) Ten-year results from the Natrelle 410 anatomical form-stable silicone breast implant core study. Aesthet Surg J 35:145–155CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Maxwell GP, Van Natta BW, Bengtson BP, Murphy DK (2015) Ten-year results from the Natrelle 410 anatomical form-stable silicone breast implant core study. Aesthet Surg J 35:145–155CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Li S, Chen L, Liu W, Mu D, Luan J (2018) Capsular contracture rate after breast augmentation with periareolar versus other two (inframammary and transaxillary) incisions: a meta-analysis. Aesthet Plast Surg 42:32–37CrossRef Li S, Chen L, Liu W, Mu D, Luan J (2018) Capsular contracture rate after breast augmentation with periareolar versus other two (inframammary and transaxillary) incisions: a meta-analysis. Aesthet Plast Surg 42:32–37CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (2006) Axillary endoscopic breast augmentation: processes derived from a 28-year experience to optimize outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:53S–80SCrossRefPubMed Tebbetts JB (2006) Axillary endoscopic breast augmentation: processes derived from a 28-year experience to optimize outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:53S–80SCrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Jacobson JM, Gatti ME, Schaffner AD, Hill LM, Spear SL (2012) Effect of incision choice on outcomes in primary breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 32:456–462CrossRefPubMed Jacobson JM, Gatti ME, Schaffner AD, Hill LM, Spear SL (2012) Effect of incision choice on outcomes in primary breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 32:456–462CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Endoscopic Transaxillary Versus Inframammary Approaches for Breast Augmentation Using Shaped Implants: A Matched Case–Control Study
Authors
Dong Won Lee
Soo Jung Kim
Hanjo Kim
Publication date
01-06-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01324-6

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 3/2019 Go to the issue