Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2013

01-04-2013 | Original Article

Muscle-Splitting, Subglandular, and Partial Submuscular Augmentation Mammoplasties: A 12-year Retrospective Analysis of 2026 Primary Cases

Author: Umar Daraz Khan

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 2/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Augmentation mammoplasty is a commonly performed procedure with a very high satisfaction rate. Various techniques have been described since the report of the first augmentation mammoplasty in 1963. Muscle-splitting augmentation mammoplasty, a technique first published in 2007, has been used by the author for primary and secondary augmentation mammoplasties and for mastopexy with augmentation.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of data prospectively collected using the Excel spreadsheet was performed. The patients were divided into three groups. The mammoplasty for group A used the subglandular pocket. In group B, the partial submuscular pocket was used for mammoplasties. Both of these groups had their mammoplasties performed between 1999 and 2005. Group C, the third group, included patients who had muscle-splitting mammoplasties between 2005 and 2011.

Results

Group A involved 793 patients who had their augmentation mammoplasties in the subglandular pocket. Of these 793 patients, 751 had the same size implants and were included in the analysis. The mean age of the patients in group A was 30.9 ± 7.98 years (range 18–59 years), and their mean implant size was 317.5 cc ± 2.05 (range 200–555). In group A, 45.1 % (n = 339) of the patients were smokers, and 62.2 % (n = 467) had drains. The majority of the patients (78 %) had an overnight stay in the clinic. Hematoma was seen in 2.7 % (n = 20) of the group A patients. Revision was performed for 6 % (n = 45). Periprosthetic infection was seen in 0.4 % (n = 3) and minor wound healing problems in 1.3 % (n = 10). Group B comprised 110 patients who had mammoplasties performed in partial submuscular pockets. All the patients had the same size implants. The mean age of the group B patients was 33 ± 8.26 years (range 20–58 years), and their mean implant size was 300.6 cc ± 35.92 (range 205–395). Of these 110 patients, 51.8 % (n = 57) were smokers, and 94.5 % (n = 104) had drains. Hematoma was seen in 1.8 % (n = 2), and revision was performed for 7.3 % (n = 8) in the submuscular subgroup. Infection was seen in 3.6 % (n = 4) and minor wound healing problems in 4.5 % (n = 5). Group C consisted of 1,123 patients who had breast augmentation in the muscle-splitting biplane. Of these 1,123 patients, 914 had the same size implants. The mean age of the patients was 30.0 ± 8.78 years (range 18–67 years), and their mean implant size was 338.2 cc ± 58.01 (range 170–655). In group C, 33.6 % of the patients were smokers, and 8 % had drains. The majority of the patients (93.4 %) were treated as day cases. Hematoma was seen in 0.7 %, and 1.2 % of the patients had revision surgery. Infection was seen in 1.6 % (n = 15) and minor wound healing in 4 % (n = 45).

Conclusion

Muscle-splitting mammoplasty is a technique that can be performed as a day case without drains. The overall complications in the group were significantly lower than with the other two techniques performed by the author.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a 41 level of evidence to each article. For a full description of 42 these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the 43 Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors 44 http://​www.​springer.​com/​00266.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Cronin TD, Gerow RM (1964) Augmentation mammoplasty: new “natural feel” prosthesis. In: Translation of the third international congress of the plastic surgery, pp. 41–49. Excerpta medica international congress series, no. 66. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam Cronin TD, Gerow RM (1964) Augmentation mammoplasty: new “natural feel” prosthesis. In: Translation of the third international congress of the plastic surgery, pp. 41–49. Excerpta medica international congress series, no. 66. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam
2.
go back to reference Biggs TM, Yarish RS (1990) Augmentation mammoplasty: a comparative analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 85:368PubMedCrossRef Biggs TM, Yarish RS (1990) Augmentation mammoplasty: a comparative analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 85:368PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Dempsey WC, Latham WD (1968) Subpectoral implants in augmentation mammoplasty: a preliminary report. Plast Reconstr Surg 42:515PubMedCrossRef Dempsey WC, Latham WD (1968) Subpectoral implants in augmentation mammoplasty: a preliminary report. Plast Reconstr Surg 42:515PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (2001) Dual-plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant soft tissue relationship in a wide range of breast types. Plast Reconstr Surg 107:1255PubMedCrossRef Tebbetts JB (2001) Dual-plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant soft tissue relationship in a wide range of breast types. Plast Reconstr Surg 107:1255PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Spear LS, Schwartz J, Dayan JH, Clemens MW (2009) Outcome assessment of breast distortion following submuscular breast augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:44–48CrossRef Spear LS, Schwartz J, Dayan JH, Clemens MW (2009) Outcome assessment of breast distortion following submuscular breast augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:44–48CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Graf RM, Bernardes A, Rippel R, Araujo LRR, Damasio RCC, Auersvald A (2003) Subfascial breast implant: a new procedure. Plast Reconstr Surg 111:904PubMedCrossRef Graf RM, Bernardes A, Rippel R, Araujo LRR, Damasio RCC, Auersvald A (2003) Subfascial breast implant: a new procedure. Plast Reconstr Surg 111:904PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Khan UD (2007) Muscle-splitting biplane breast augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 31:353–358 Khan UD (2007) Muscle-splitting biplane breast augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 31:353–358
9.
go back to reference Khan UD (2009) Dynamic breasts: a common complication following partial submuscular augmentation and its correction using muscle-splitting biplane technique. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:353–360CrossRef Khan UD (2009) Dynamic breasts: a common complication following partial submuscular augmentation and its correction using muscle-splitting biplane technique. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:353–360CrossRef
10.
11.
go back to reference Khan UD (2009) Selection of breast pocket using pinch test in augmentation mammoplasty: can it be relied in long term? Aesthet Plast Surg 33:780–781CrossRef Khan UD (2009) Selection of breast pocket using pinch test in augmentation mammoplasty: can it be relied in long term? Aesthet Plast Surg 33:780–781CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Khan UD (2010) Augmentation mastopexy in muscle-splitting biplane: an outcome of first 44 consecutive cases of mastopexies in a new pocket. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:313–321CrossRef Khan UD (2010) Augmentation mastopexy in muscle-splitting biplane: an outcome of first 44 consecutive cases of mastopexies in a new pocket. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:313–321CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Khan UD (2009) Breast augmentation in asymmetrically placed nipple areolar complex in horizontal axis: lateralisation of implant pocket to offset lateralised nipples. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:591–596CrossRef Khan UD (2009) Breast augmentation in asymmetrically placed nipple areolar complex in horizontal axis: lateralisation of implant pocket to offset lateralised nipples. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:591–596CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Khan UD (2011) Multiplane technique for simultaneous submuscular breast augmentation and internal glandulopexy using inframammary crease incision in selected patients with early ptosis. Eur J Plast Surg 34:337–343CrossRef Khan UD (2011) Multiplane technique for simultaneous submuscular breast augmentation and internal glandulopexy using inframammary crease incision in selected patients with early ptosis. Eur J Plast Surg 34:337–343CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Khan UD (2011) Breast and chest asymmetries: classification and relative distribution of common asymmetries in patients requesting augmentation mammoplasty. Eur J Plast Surg 34:375–385CrossRef Khan UD (2011) Breast and chest asymmetries: classification and relative distribution of common asymmetries in patients requesting augmentation mammoplasty. Eur J Plast Surg 34:375–385CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Khan UD (2010) Combining muscle-splitting biplane with multilayer capsuloraphy for the correction of bottoming down following subglandular augmentation. Eur J Plast Surg 33:259–269CrossRef Khan UD (2010) Combining muscle-splitting biplane with multilayer capsuloraphy for the correction of bottoming down following subglandular augmentation. Eur J Plast Surg 33:259–269CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Khan UD (2009) Acquired synmastia following subglandular mammoplasty and the use of submuscular splitting biplane for its correction. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:605–610CrossRef Khan UD (2009) Acquired synmastia following subglandular mammoplasty and the use of submuscular splitting biplane for its correction. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:605–610CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Khan UD (2012) High transverse capsuloplasty for the correction of malpositioned implants following augmentation mammoplasty in partial submuscular plane. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:590–599 Khan UD (2012) High transverse capsuloplasty for the correction of malpositioned implants following augmentation mammoplasty in partial submuscular plane. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:590–599
19.
go back to reference Khan UD (2012) Secondary augmentation mammoplasties and periprosthetic infection. A three-year retrospective review of 92 secondary mammoplasties performed by a single surgeon. Aesthet Surg J 32:465–733 Khan UD (2012) Secondary augmentation mammoplasties and periprosthetic infection. A three-year retrospective review of 92 secondary mammoplasties performed by a single surgeon. Aesthet Surg J 32:465–733
20.
go back to reference Khan UD (2009) Breast autoinflation with sterile pus as a marker of implant rupture: single-stage treatment and outcome for five consecutive cases. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:58–65CrossRef Khan UD (2009) Breast autoinflation with sterile pus as a marker of implant rupture: single-stage treatment and outcome for five consecutive cases. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:58–65CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Baxter RA (2011) Update on the split-muscle technique for breast augmentation: prevention and correction of animation distortion and double-bubble deformity. Aesthet Plast Surg 35:426–429CrossRef Baxter RA (2011) Update on the split-muscle technique for breast augmentation: prevention and correction of animation distortion and double-bubble deformity. Aesthet Plast Surg 35:426–429CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Berlanda M (2010) Muscle-splitting augmentation: personal experience with the new technique. In: Umar DK (ed) X Miedzynoraodowy Kongres Medycyny Estetycznej i Anti-Aging, 24–26 September 2010, Warsaw Berlanda M (2010) Muscle-splitting augmentation: personal experience with the new technique. In: Umar DK (ed) X Miedzynoraodowy Kongres Medycyny Estetycznej i Anti-Aging, 24–26 September 2010, Warsaw
23.
go back to reference Berlanda M (2009) Mastoplastica additiva “Per separazione intramuscolare”: Esperienza personale con la nuova tecnica descritta da Umar Khan. Presented at the 11th international congress of aesthetic medicine society, 15–17 October 2009, Milan Berlanda M (2009) Mastoplastica additiva “Per separazione intramuscolare”: Esperienza personale con la nuova tecnica descritta da Umar Khan. Presented at the 11th international congress of aesthetic medicine society, 15–17 October 2009, Milan
24.
go back to reference Stodell M, McArthur G, James M (2010) Biplaner breast augmentation: a case series supporting its use and benefits. Presented at the annual meeting of the British association of aesthetic plastic surgeons (BAAPS), 22–24 September 2010, London Stodell M, McArthur G, James M (2010) Biplaner breast augmentation: a case series supporting its use and benefits. Presented at the annual meeting of the British association of aesthetic plastic surgeons (BAAPS), 22–24 September 2010, London
25.
go back to reference Aštrauskas T, Vikšraitis S, Maslauskas K, Kaikaris V (2009) Comparison of two methods of breast augmentation: muscle-splitting versus traditional subpectoral method. Presented at the 11th congress of ESPRAS, 26–27 September 2009, Rhodes Aštrauskas T, Vikšraitis S, Maslauskas K, Kaikaris V (2009) Comparison of two methods of breast augmentation: muscle-splitting versus traditional subpectoral method. Presented at the 11th congress of ESPRAS, 26–27 September 2009, Rhodes
26.
go back to reference Stumpfle RL, Pereira-Lima LF, Valiati AA, Da Mazzini GS (2012) Transaxillary muscle-splitting breast augmentation: experience with 160 cases. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:343–348CrossRef Stumpfle RL, Pereira-Lima LF, Valiati AA, Da Mazzini GS (2012) Transaxillary muscle-splitting breast augmentation: experience with 160 cases. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:343–348CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (2006) Achieving a zero percent reoperation rate at 3 years in a 50-consecutive-case augmentation mammoplasty premarket approval study. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:1453–1457PubMedCrossRef Tebbetts JB (2006) Achieving a zero percent reoperation rate at 3 years in a 50-consecutive-case augmentation mammoplasty premarket approval study. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:1453–1457PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Heden P, Bone B, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Walker PS (2006) Style 410 cohesive silicone breast implants: safety and effectiveness at 5 to 9 years after implantation. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:1281–1287PubMedCrossRef Heden P, Bone B, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Walker PS (2006) Style 410 cohesive silicone breast implants: safety and effectiveness at 5 to 9 years after implantation. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:1281–1287PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Cunningham B (2007) The Mentor core study on silicone MemoryGel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 120:19S–29SPubMedCrossRef Cunningham B (2007) The Mentor core study on silicone MemoryGel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 120:19S–29SPubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Nahi et al (2011) A 15-year experience with primary breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:1301–1313 Nahi et al (2011) A 15-year experience with primary breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:1301–1313
31.
go back to reference Handel N, Cordray T, Gutierrez J, Jensen JA (2006) A long-term study of outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction with breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:757–767 Handel N, Cordray T, Gutierrez J, Jensen JA (2006) A long-term study of outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction with breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:757–767
32.
go back to reference Khan UD (2011) Augmentation mammoplasty in breasts with port-wine stains: are these patients at increased risk of haematoma? Aesthet Plast Surg 35:130–131CrossRef Khan UD (2011) Augmentation mammoplasty in breasts with port-wine stains: are these patients at increased risk of haematoma? Aesthet Plast Surg 35:130–131CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Khan UD (2010) Breast augmentation, antibiotic prophylaxis, and infection: comparative analysis of 1,628 primary augmentation mammoplasties to assess the role and efficacy of length of antibiotic prophylaxis. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:42–47CrossRef Khan UD (2010) Breast augmentation, antibiotic prophylaxis, and infection: comparative analysis of 1,628 primary augmentation mammoplasties to assess the role and efficacy of length of antibiotic prophylaxis. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:42–47CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Khan UD (2011) Back-to-front flipping of implants following augmentation mammoplasty and the role of physical characteristics in a round cohesive gel silicone breast implant: retrospective analysis of 3,458 breast implants by a single surgeon. Aesthet Plast Surg 35:125–128CrossRef Khan UD (2011) Back-to-front flipping of implants following augmentation mammoplasty and the role of physical characteristics in a round cohesive gel silicone breast implant: retrospective analysis of 3,458 breast implants by a single surgeon. Aesthet Plast Surg 35:125–128CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Baeke JL (2002) Breast deformity caused by anatomical or teardrop implant rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:2555PubMedCrossRef Baeke JL (2002) Breast deformity caused by anatomical or teardrop implant rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:2555PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Muscle-Splitting, Subglandular, and Partial Submuscular Augmentation Mammoplasties: A 12-year Retrospective Analysis of 2026 Primary Cases
Author
Umar Daraz Khan
Publication date
01-04-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 2/2013
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-012-0026-8

Other articles of this Issue 2/2013

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2013 Go to the issue

Announcements

Announcements