Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy

Evan W. Beale, Smita Ramanadham, Bridget Harrison, Yvonne Rasko, Bryan Armijo, Rod J. Rohrich

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Augmentation mastopexy remains a procedure wrought with high rates of complications and revisions given the diametrically opposing forces in this combined procedure. Thus, many surgeons remain cautious and err on a staged procedure. This article provides a dependable, predictable, and straightforward approach to a challenging operation. The technique centers on five key points, including precise preoperative markings, 8-cm vertical limbs with a broad pedicle base, limited undermining of thick skin flaps, small subpectoral implants, and movement of the nipple no more than 4 cm. Methods: Eighty-three patients who underwent augmentation mastopexy performed by a single surgeon (R.J.R) were included in a retrospective chart review following institutional review board approval. Information regarding demographics, implant contracture, degree of breast ptosis, and standard breast measurements was recorded. Operative data and postoperative complications were documented. Results: At a mean follow-up of 38 months, major complications included 16 revisions and one readmission for superficial thrombophlebitis. The majority of revisions were for scar revision or implant size change. Minor complications included two hematomas, one seroma, three T-point skin sloughs, and two minor infections. There were no instances of major flap loss or nipple loss. Conclusions: The technique described provides a safe and conservative surgical approach for one-stage augmentation mastopexy resulting in the avoidance of major pitfalls and irreversible complications of flap or nipple loss while achieving the desired results of the patient and surgeon.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Volume133
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2014

Fingerprint

Nipples
Breast
Seroma
Skin
Thrombophlebitis
Research Ethics Committees
Contracture
Hematoma
Cicatrix
Extremities
Demography
Infection
Surgeons

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Beale, E. W., Ramanadham, S., Harrison, B., Rasko, Y., Armijo, B., & Rohrich, R. J. (2014). Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 133(3). https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000000079

Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy. / Beale, Evan W.; Ramanadham, Smita; Harrison, Bridget; Rasko, Yvonne; Armijo, Bryan; Rohrich, Rod J.

In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Vol. 133, No. 3, 03.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Beale, EW, Ramanadham, S, Harrison, B, Rasko, Y, Armijo, B & Rohrich, RJ 2014, 'Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy', Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, vol. 133, no. 3. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000000079
Beale EW, Ramanadham S, Harrison B, Rasko Y, Armijo B, Rohrich RJ. Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2014 Mar;133(3). https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000000079
Beale, Evan W. ; Ramanadham, Smita ; Harrison, Bridget ; Rasko, Yvonne ; Armijo, Bryan ; Rohrich, Rod J. / Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy. In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2014 ; Vol. 133, No. 3.
@article{a75b5c1a79184dcbb492c2a3182960ef,
title = "Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy",
abstract = "Background: Augmentation mastopexy remains a procedure wrought with high rates of complications and revisions given the diametrically opposing forces in this combined procedure. Thus, many surgeons remain cautious and err on a staged procedure. This article provides a dependable, predictable, and straightforward approach to a challenging operation. The technique centers on five key points, including precise preoperative markings, 8-cm vertical limbs with a broad pedicle base, limited undermining of thick skin flaps, small subpectoral implants, and movement of the nipple no more than 4 cm. Methods: Eighty-three patients who underwent augmentation mastopexy performed by a single surgeon (R.J.R) were included in a retrospective chart review following institutional review board approval. Information regarding demographics, implant contracture, degree of breast ptosis, and standard breast measurements was recorded. Operative data and postoperative complications were documented. Results: At a mean follow-up of 38 months, major complications included 16 revisions and one readmission for superficial thrombophlebitis. The majority of revisions were for scar revision or implant size change. Minor complications included two hematomas, one seroma, three T-point skin sloughs, and two minor infections. There were no instances of major flap loss or nipple loss. Conclusions: The technique described provides a safe and conservative surgical approach for one-stage augmentation mastopexy resulting in the avoidance of major pitfalls and irreversible complications of flap or nipple loss while achieving the desired results of the patient and surgeon.",
author = "Beale, {Evan W.} and Smita Ramanadham and Bridget Harrison and Yvonne Rasko and Bryan Armijo and Rohrich, {Rod J.}",
year = "2014",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1097/PRS.0000000000000079",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "133",
journal = "Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery",
issn = "0032-1052",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy

AU - Beale, Evan W.

AU - Ramanadham, Smita

AU - Harrison, Bridget

AU - Rasko, Yvonne

AU - Armijo, Bryan

AU - Rohrich, Rod J.

PY - 2014/3

Y1 - 2014/3

N2 - Background: Augmentation mastopexy remains a procedure wrought with high rates of complications and revisions given the diametrically opposing forces in this combined procedure. Thus, many surgeons remain cautious and err on a staged procedure. This article provides a dependable, predictable, and straightforward approach to a challenging operation. The technique centers on five key points, including precise preoperative markings, 8-cm vertical limbs with a broad pedicle base, limited undermining of thick skin flaps, small subpectoral implants, and movement of the nipple no more than 4 cm. Methods: Eighty-three patients who underwent augmentation mastopexy performed by a single surgeon (R.J.R) were included in a retrospective chart review following institutional review board approval. Information regarding demographics, implant contracture, degree of breast ptosis, and standard breast measurements was recorded. Operative data and postoperative complications were documented. Results: At a mean follow-up of 38 months, major complications included 16 revisions and one readmission for superficial thrombophlebitis. The majority of revisions were for scar revision or implant size change. Minor complications included two hematomas, one seroma, three T-point skin sloughs, and two minor infections. There were no instances of major flap loss or nipple loss. Conclusions: The technique described provides a safe and conservative surgical approach for one-stage augmentation mastopexy resulting in the avoidance of major pitfalls and irreversible complications of flap or nipple loss while achieving the desired results of the patient and surgeon.

AB - Background: Augmentation mastopexy remains a procedure wrought with high rates of complications and revisions given the diametrically opposing forces in this combined procedure. Thus, many surgeons remain cautious and err on a staged procedure. This article provides a dependable, predictable, and straightforward approach to a challenging operation. The technique centers on five key points, including precise preoperative markings, 8-cm vertical limbs with a broad pedicle base, limited undermining of thick skin flaps, small subpectoral implants, and movement of the nipple no more than 4 cm. Methods: Eighty-three patients who underwent augmentation mastopexy performed by a single surgeon (R.J.R) were included in a retrospective chart review following institutional review board approval. Information regarding demographics, implant contracture, degree of breast ptosis, and standard breast measurements was recorded. Operative data and postoperative complications were documented. Results: At a mean follow-up of 38 months, major complications included 16 revisions and one readmission for superficial thrombophlebitis. The majority of revisions were for scar revision or implant size change. Minor complications included two hematomas, one seroma, three T-point skin sloughs, and two minor infections. There were no instances of major flap loss or nipple loss. Conclusions: The technique described provides a safe and conservative surgical approach for one-stage augmentation mastopexy resulting in the avoidance of major pitfalls and irreversible complications of flap or nipple loss while achieving the desired results of the patient and surgeon.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84897803570&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84897803570&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000079

DO - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000079

M3 - Article

C2 - 24572873

AN - SCOPUS:84897803570

VL - 133

JO - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

JF - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

SN - 0032-1052

IS - 3

ER -