Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2015

01-04-2015 | Original Article

Chinese Women’s Preferences and Concerns regarding Incision Location for Breast Augmentation Surgery: A Survey of 216 Patients

Authors: Jingjing Sun, Chunjun Liu, Dali Mu, Keming Wang, Sainan Zhu, Yi He, Jie Luan

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 2/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The axillary approach is the dominant incision used in China for breast augmentation. Systematic preoperative education regarding incision locations for breast augmentation is scarce in China. In this study, we surveyed Chinese patients to ascertain their preferences and concerns for incision location based on a comprehensive understanding of different incisions.

Methods

We used a literature review, patient interviews, and expert panels to develop the preoperative education material and questionnaire regarding different incision locations. The respondents were requested to choose one incision location before and after they received the preoperative education. Their initial choices and final decisions as well as the reasons for these choices were recorded and analyzed. Multinomial logistic regression was preformed to analyze the affecting factors on the incision choice.

Results

A total of 216 Chinese women participated in the study between 2012.5 and 2014.1. Initially, 176 (81.48 %) women chose axillary incision, 27 (12.50 %) chose periareolar incision, and 13 (6.02 %) chose inframammary fold (IMF) incision. After they received preoperative education on incisions, the axillary and periareolar approaches decreased to 117 (54.17 %) and 13 (6.02 %), respectively, while IMF increased to 86 (39.81 %). The easily hidden scar (43.98 %), lower capsular contracture rate (23.15 %), and lower possibility of injury to the breast parenchyma (17.13 %) ranked as the top 3 reasons for the incision choice. Patients with a preoperative cup size of AA were 12.316 times more likely to choose the axillary approach relative to the IMF approach compared with those with a B cup (P = 0.044; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.069–141.923). For each one-unit increase in BMI, the odds that a patient would choose the axillary versus the periareolar approach decreased by 32.4 % (P = 0.049; 95 % CI 0.457–0.999).

Conclusions

The systematic and objective preoperative education material and questionnaire regarding different incision locations helped the Chinese patients make truly informed decisions and express their personal requirements. The axillary approach was the first option for more than half of Chinese women mainly because an easily hidden scar was considered the primary concern during the decision-making process. The patients with a low BMI and a small preoperative breast cup size were more likely to choose an axillary incision. However, a considerable number of Chinese women would choose the IMF incision and value its superiority in terms of a lower capsular contracture rate, less tissue trauma, and lower possibility of injury to the breast parenchyma.

Level of Evidence IV

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.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Reece EM, Ghavami A, Hoxworth RE, Alvarez SA, Hatef DA, Brown S, Rohrich RJ (2009) Primary breast augmentation today: a survey of current breast augmentation practice patterns. Aesthet Surg J 29:116–121CrossRefPubMed Reece EM, Ghavami A, Hoxworth RE, Alvarez SA, Hatef DA, Brown S, Rohrich RJ (2009) Primary breast augmentation today: a survey of current breast augmentation practice patterns. Aesthet Surg J 29:116–121CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Sevin A, Sevin K, Senen D, Deren O, Adanali G, Erdogan B (2006) Augmentation mammaplasty: retrospective analysis of 210 cases. Aesthet Plast Surg 30:651–654CrossRef Sevin A, Sevin K, Senen D, Deren O, Adanali G, Erdogan B (2006) Augmentation mammaplasty: retrospective analysis of 210 cases. Aesthet Plast Surg 30:651–654CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Chinese Society of Plastic Surgery (2013) Guidelines for breast augmentation with silicone implants. Zhonghua Zheng Xing Wai Ke Za Zhi 29:1–4 Chinese Society of Plastic Surgery (2013) Guidelines for breast augmentation with silicone implants. Zhonghua Zheng Xing Wai Ke Za Zhi 29:1–4
5.
go back to reference Alpert BS, Lalonde DH (2008) MOC-PS(SM) CME Article: breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:1–7CrossRefPubMed Alpert BS, Lalonde DH (2008) MOC-PS(SM) CME Article: breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:1–7CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (2010) Augmentation mammaplasty: redefining the patient and surgeon experience. Mosby Elsevier, Amsterdam Tebbetts JB (2010) Augmentation mammaplasty: redefining the patient and surgeon experience. Mosby Elsevier, Amsterdam
7.
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
8.
9.
go back to reference Hidalgo DA (2000) Breast augmentation: choosing the optimal incision, implant, and pocket plane. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:2202–2216CrossRefPubMed Hidalgo DA (2000) Breast augmentation: choosing the optimal incision, implant, and pocket plane. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:2202–2216CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Niechajev I (2010) Improvements in transaxillary breast augmentation. Aesthetic Plast Surg 34:322–329CrossRefPubMed Niechajev I (2010) Improvements in transaxillary breast augmentation. Aesthetic Plast Surg 34:322–329CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Momeni A, Padron NT, Bannasch H, Borges J, Stark BG (2006) Endoscopic transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: a safe and predictable procedure. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 59:1076–1081CrossRefPubMed Momeni A, Padron NT, Bannasch H, Borges J, Stark BG (2006) Endoscopic transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: a safe and predictable procedure. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 59:1076–1081CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Kolker AR, Austen WG Jr, Slavin SA (2010) Endoscopic-assisted transaxillary breast augmentation: minimizing complications and maximizing results with improvements in patient selection and technique. Ann Plast Surg 64:667–673PubMed Kolker AR, Austen WG Jr, Slavin SA (2010) Endoscopic-assisted transaxillary breast augmentation: minimizing complications and maximizing results with improvements in patient selection and technique. Ann Plast Surg 64:667–673PubMed
13.
go back to reference Araco A, Araco F, Sorge R, Gravante G (2011) Sensitivity of the nipple-areola complex and areolar pain following aesthetic breast augmentation in a retrospective series of 1200 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 128:984–989CrossRefPubMed Araco A, Araco F, Sorge R, Gravante G (2011) Sensitivity of the nipple-areola complex and areolar pain following aesthetic breast augmentation in a retrospective series of 1200 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 128:984–989CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Huang GJ, Wichmann JL, Mills DC (2011) Transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: a single surgeon’s 20-year experience. Aesthet Surg J 31:781–801CrossRefPubMed Huang GJ, Wichmann JL, Mills DC (2011) Transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: a single surgeon’s 20-year experience. Aesthet Surg J 31:781–801CrossRefPubMed
15.
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
16.
go back to reference Barbato C, Pena M, Triana C, Zambrano MA (2004) Augmentation mammoplasty using the retrofascia approach. Aesthetic Plast Surg 28:148–152CrossRefPubMed Barbato C, Pena M, Triana C, Zambrano MA (2004) Augmentation mammoplasty using the retrofascia approach. Aesthetic Plast Surg 28:148–152CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Wiener TC (2008) Relationship of incision choice to capsular contracture. Aesthetic Plast Surg 32:303–306CrossRefPubMed Wiener TC (2008) Relationship of incision choice to capsular contracture. Aesthetic Plast Surg 32:303–306CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Bartsich S, Ascherman JA, Whittier S, Yao CA, Rohde C (2011) The breast: a clean-contaminated surgical site. Aesthetic Surg J 31:802–806CrossRef Bartsich S, Ascherman JA, Whittier S, Yao CA, Rohde C (2011) The breast: a clean-contaminated surgical site. Aesthetic Surg J 31:802–806CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Adams WP (2008) The process of breast augmentation: four sequential steps for optimizing outcomes for patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 122:1892–1900CrossRefPubMed Adams WP (2008) The process of breast augmentation: four sequential steps for optimizing outcomes for patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 122:1892–1900CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Henriksen TF, Fryzek JP, Hölmich LR, Mclaughlin JK, Kjøller K, Høyer AP, Olsen JH, Friis S (2005) Surgical intervention and capsular contracture after breast augmentation. Ann Plast Surg 54:343–351CrossRefPubMed Henriksen TF, Fryzek JP, Hölmich LR, Mclaughlin JK, Kjøller K, Høyer AP, Olsen JH, Friis S (2005) Surgical intervention and capsular contracture after breast augmentation. Ann Plast Surg 54:343–351CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Okwueze MI, Spear ME, Zwyghuizen AM, Braün SA, Ajmal N, Nanney LB, Hagan KF, Wolfort SF, Shack RB (2006) Effect of augmentation mammaplasty on breast sensation. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:73–83CrossRefPubMed Okwueze MI, Spear ME, Zwyghuizen AM, Braün SA, Ajmal N, Nanney LB, Hagan KF, Wolfort SF, Shack RB (2006) Effect of augmentation mammaplasty on breast sensation. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:73–83CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Mofid MM, Klatsky SA, Singh NK, Nahabedian MY (2006) Nipple-areola complex sensitivity after primary breast augmentation: a comparison of periareolar and inframammary incision approaches. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:1694–1698CrossRefPubMed Mofid MM, Klatsky SA, Singh NK, Nahabedian MY (2006) Nipple-areola complex sensitivity after primary breast augmentation: a comparison of periareolar and inframammary incision approaches. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:1694–1698CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Pitanguy I, Vaena M, Radwanski HN, Nunes D, Vargas AF (2007) Relative implant volume and sensibility alterations after breast augmentation. Aesthetic Plast Surg 31:238–243CrossRefPubMed Pitanguy I, Vaena M, Radwanski HN, Nunes D, Vargas AF (2007) Relative implant volume and sensibility alterations after breast augmentation. Aesthetic Plast Surg 31:238–243CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Stutman RL, Codner M, Mahoney A, Amei A (2012) Comparison of breast augmentation incisions and common complications. Aesthetic Plast Surg 36:1096–1104CrossRefPubMed Stutman RL, Codner M, Mahoney A, Amei A (2012) Comparison of breast augmentation incisions and common complications. Aesthetic Plast Surg 36:1096–1104CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Lista F, Ahmad J (2013) Evidence-based medicine: augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:1684–1696CrossRefPubMed Lista F, Ahmad J (2013) Evidence-based medicine: augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:1684–1696CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Blount AL, Martin MD, Lineberry KD, Kettaneh N, Alfonso DR (2013) Capsular contracture rate in a low-risk population after primary augmentation mammaplasty. Aesthet Surg J 33:516–521CrossRefPubMed Blount AL, Martin MD, Lineberry KD, Kettaneh N, Alfonso DR (2013) Capsular contracture rate in a low-risk population after primary augmentation mammaplasty. Aesthet Surg J 33:516–521CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Hammond D, Handel N, Canady J, Wixtrom RN (2014) Impact of surgical approach, together with placement and breast implant texturing, on capsular contracture: an analysis of 10-year prospective multicenter data. Plast Reconstr Surg 134:90–91CrossRefPubMed Hammond D, Handel N, Canady J, Wixtrom RN (2014) Impact of surgical approach, together with placement and breast implant texturing, on capsular contracture: an analysis of 10-year prospective multicenter data. Plast Reconstr Surg 134:90–91CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Spencer KW (1995) Patient education materials for augmentation mammaplasty patients. Plast Surg Nurs 15:190CrossRefPubMed Spencer KW (1995) Patient education materials for augmentation mammaplasty patients. Plast Surg Nurs 15:190CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Fishman JRA (2007) Post-operative information augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Surg Nurs 27:168–169CrossRefPubMed Fishman JRA (2007) Post-operative information augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Surg Nurs 27:168–169CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Gladfelter J (2003) The internet as and educational tool for breast augmentation. Plast Surg Nurs 23:121–128CrossRefPubMed Gladfelter J (2003) The internet as and educational tool for breast augmentation. Plast Surg Nurs 23:121–128CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Spector D, Mayer DK, Knafl K, Pusic A (2010) Not what I expected informational needs of women undergoing breast surgery. Plast Surg Nurs 30:70–74CrossRefPubMed Spector D, Mayer DK, Knafl K, Pusic A (2010) Not what I expected informational needs of women undergoing breast surgery. Plast Surg Nurs 30:70–74CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Dowden RV (2003) Who decides the breast augmentation parameters? Plast Reconstr Surg 112:1937–1940CrossRefPubMed Dowden RV (2003) Who decides the breast augmentation parameters? Plast Reconstr Surg 112:1937–1940CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (2002) An approach that integrates patient education and informed consent in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 110:971–978CrossRefPubMed Tebbetts JB (2002) An approach that integrates patient education and informed consent in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 110:971–978CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Naidu NS, Patrick PA (2011) The influence of career stage, practice type and location, and physician’s sex on surgical practices among board-certified plastic surgeons performing breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 31:941–952CrossRefPubMed Naidu NS, Patrick PA (2011) The influence of career stage, practice type and location, and physician’s sex on surgical practices among board-certified plastic surgeons performing breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 31:941–952CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Codner MA, Mejia JD, Locke MB et al (2011) A 15-year experience with primary breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:1300–1310CrossRefPubMed Codner MA, Mejia JD, Locke MB et al (2011) A 15-year experience with primary breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:1300–1310CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Spear SL, Murphy DK (2014) Allergan Silicone Breast Implant USCCSG. Natrelle round silicone breast implants: core study results at 10 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 133:1354–1361CrossRefPubMed Spear SL, Murphy DK (2014) Allergan Silicone Breast Implant USCCSG. Natrelle round silicone breast implants: core study results at 10 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 133:1354–1361CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Maxwell GP, Van Natta BW, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Bengtson BP (2012) Natrelle style 410 form-stable silicone breast implants: core study results at 6 years. Aesthet Surg J 32:709–717CrossRefPubMed Maxwell GP, Van Natta BW, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Bengtson BP (2012) Natrelle style 410 form-stable silicone breast implants: core study results at 6 years. Aesthet Surg J 32:709–717CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Cunningham B (2007) The Mentor core study on silicone MemoryGel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 120:19S–29S; discussion 30S–32S Cunningham B (2007) The Mentor core study on silicone MemoryGel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 120:19S–29S; discussion 30S–32S
40.
go back to reference Bengtson BP, Van Natta BW, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Maxwell GP (2007) Style USCCSG. Style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implant core study results at 3 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 120:40S–48SCrossRefPubMed Bengtson BP, Van Natta BW, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Maxwell GP (2007) Style USCCSG. Style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implant core study results at 3 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 120:40S–48SCrossRefPubMed
41.
go back to reference Stevens WG, Nahabedian MY, Calobrace MB et al (2013) Risk factor analysis for capsular contracture: a 5-year Sientra study analysis using round, smooth, and textured implants for breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:1115–1123CrossRefPubMed Stevens WG, Nahabedian MY, Calobrace MB et al (2013) Risk factor analysis for capsular contracture: a 5-year Sientra study analysis using round, smooth, and textured implants for breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:1115–1123CrossRefPubMed
42.
go back to reference Berry MG, Cucchiara V, Davies DM (2010) Breast augmentation: part II—adverse capsular contracture. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 63:2098–2107CrossRefPubMed Berry MG, Cucchiara V, Davies DM (2010) Breast augmentation: part II—adverse capsular contracture. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 63:2098–2107CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Namnoum JD, Largent J, Kaplan HM, Oefelein MG, Brown MH (2013) Primary breast augmentation clinical trial outcomes stratified by surgical incision, anatomical placement and implant device type. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66:1165–1172CrossRefPubMed Namnoum JD, Largent J, Kaplan HM, Oefelein MG, Brown MH (2013) Primary breast augmentation clinical trial outcomes stratified by surgical incision, anatomical placement and implant device type. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66:1165–1172CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Chinese Women’s Preferences and Concerns regarding Incision Location for Breast Augmentation Surgery: A Survey of 216 Patients
Authors
Jingjing Sun
Chunjun Liu
Dali Mu
Keming Wang
Sainan Zhu
Yi He
Jie Luan
Publication date
01-04-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-015-0457-0

Other articles of this Issue 2/2015

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2015 Go to the issue