Cargando…
Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth
Background: Thanks to 3D imaging, it is possible to measure the influence of different parameters on breast augmentation. In this study, we compare the effect of different shapes and sizes of breast implants on the topography of the resulting breast. Furthermore, the impact of different breast impla...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8745801/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35011890 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11010149 |
_version_ | 1784630434010759168 |
---|---|
author | Lotter, Luisa Zucal, Isabel Brébant, Vanessa Heine, Norbert Hartmann, Robin Mueller, Karolina Prantl, Lukas Schiltz, Daniel |
author_facet | Lotter, Luisa Zucal, Isabel Brébant, Vanessa Heine, Norbert Hartmann, Robin Mueller, Karolina Prantl, Lukas Schiltz, Daniel |
author_sort | Lotter, Luisa |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Thanks to 3D imaging, it is possible to measure the influence of different parameters on breast augmentation. In this study, we compare the effect of different shapes and sizes of breast implants on the topography of the resulting breast. Furthermore, the impact of different breast implants on inter-landmark distances and on changes of the nipple position was assessed. Methods: This interventional prospective study was carried out on 10 female patients after collecting informed consent. 3D scans of the native and augmented breasts were performed intraoperatively with small, medium, and large sizes of both anatomical and round implants, resulting in a total of n = 130 single breast scans. These scans were analyzed for topographic shift quantification, nipple migration, and inter-landmark distances of the breast. Results: Implant size, but not implant shape leads to significant topographic shifts of the breast (p < 0.001 and p = 0.900, respectively). Both round and anatomical implants lead to a significantly higher volumetric increase in the upper quadrants compared to the lower quadrants (p < 0.001). Nipple migration into the superomedial quadrant was seen in about 90% of augmentations. No evident differences in inter-landmark distances were observed when round and anatomical implants of different sizes were compared. Conclusions: Implant size rather than shape influences the postoperative aesthetic results. No significant difference in topographic shift was found comparing round and anatomical implants, suggesting that both implant shapes result in comparable aesthetic outcomes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8745801 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87458012022-01-11 Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth Lotter, Luisa Zucal, Isabel Brébant, Vanessa Heine, Norbert Hartmann, Robin Mueller, Karolina Prantl, Lukas Schiltz, Daniel J Clin Med Article Background: Thanks to 3D imaging, it is possible to measure the influence of different parameters on breast augmentation. In this study, we compare the effect of different shapes and sizes of breast implants on the topography of the resulting breast. Furthermore, the impact of different breast implants on inter-landmark distances and on changes of the nipple position was assessed. Methods: This interventional prospective study was carried out on 10 female patients after collecting informed consent. 3D scans of the native and augmented breasts were performed intraoperatively with small, medium, and large sizes of both anatomical and round implants, resulting in a total of n = 130 single breast scans. These scans were analyzed for topographic shift quantification, nipple migration, and inter-landmark distances of the breast. Results: Implant size, but not implant shape leads to significant topographic shifts of the breast (p < 0.001 and p = 0.900, respectively). Both round and anatomical implants lead to a significantly higher volumetric increase in the upper quadrants compared to the lower quadrants (p < 0.001). Nipple migration into the superomedial quadrant was seen in about 90% of augmentations. No evident differences in inter-landmark distances were observed when round and anatomical implants of different sizes were compared. Conclusions: Implant size rather than shape influences the postoperative aesthetic results. No significant difference in topographic shift was found comparing round and anatomical implants, suggesting that both implant shapes result in comparable aesthetic outcomes. MDPI 2021-12-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8745801/ /pubmed/35011890 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11010149 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Lotter, Luisa Zucal, Isabel Brébant, Vanessa Heine, Norbert Hartmann, Robin Mueller, Karolina Prantl, Lukas Schiltz, Daniel Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth |
title | Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth |
title_full | Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth |
title_fullStr | Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth |
title_full_unstemmed | Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth |
title_short | Intraoperative 3D Comparison of Round and Anatomical Breast Implants: Dispelling a Myth |
title_sort | intraoperative 3d comparison of round and anatomical breast implants: dispelling a myth |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8745801/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35011890 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11010149 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lotterluisa intraoperative3dcomparisonofroundandanatomicalbreastimplantsdispellingamyth AT zucalisabel intraoperative3dcomparisonofroundandanatomicalbreastimplantsdispellingamyth AT brebantvanessa intraoperative3dcomparisonofroundandanatomicalbreastimplantsdispellingamyth AT heinenorbert intraoperative3dcomparisonofroundandanatomicalbreastimplantsdispellingamyth AT hartmannrobin intraoperative3dcomparisonofroundandanatomicalbreastimplantsdispellingamyth AT muellerkarolina intraoperative3dcomparisonofroundandanatomicalbreastimplantsdispellingamyth AT prantllukas intraoperative3dcomparisonofroundandanatomicalbreastimplantsdispellingamyth AT schiltzdaniel intraoperative3dcomparisonofroundandanatomicalbreastimplantsdispellingamyth |