title: Prospective photographic measurement study of 196 cases of breast augmentation, mastopexy, augmentation/mastopexy, and breast reduction.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Our understanding of breast shape and size changes after surgery is limited by a lack of measurement studies that evaluate and compare changes in breast dimensions after cosmetic breast procedures. This study was undertaken to remedy this deficiency.
  
  
  METHODS
  Women undergoing primary vertical mastopexy, augmentation/mastopexy, and reduction were evaluated prospectively from 2002 to 2012. Breast augmentation patients were also measured prospectively over a 6-month period during the study. A total of 196 consecutive patients meeting the inclusion criteria-at least 3 months' follow-up and no subsequent breast surgery-were evaluated (inclusion rate, 88.3 percent).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Both nipples were located at or above the level of maximum preoperative breast projection in 60 percent of women presenting with ptosis. The maximum preoperative nipple displacement was 6.5 cm. All four procedures increased breast projection and upper pole projection, with a significantly greater boost when implants were combined with mastopexy (p < 0.01). Breast augmentation lowered the lower pole level (p < 0.001) and minimally elevated the breast mound, with no change in nipple level. Vertical mastopexy and reduction elevated the lower pole and breast mound, reduced areola size, and increased the breast parenchymal ratio (p < 0.001).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Vertical mammaplasty corrects glandular sagging and provides a modest increase in breast projection and upper pole projection. Augmentation/mastopexy most effectively treats upper pole deflation and ptosis. In ptosis, the nipple descends primarily with the breast, not on it. Nipple repositioning (<6.5 cm) is preferred over transposition to avoid overelevation and improve safety.
  
  
  METHODS
  Therapeutic, II.
authors: Leawood, Kan. From the Swanson Center.
authors: Eric
authors: E
authors: Swanson
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001940:Breast / Q000033:anatomy & histology* / Q000601:surgery*; D019928:Breast Implantation / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D016462:Mammaplasty / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D009558:Nipples / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000601:surgery; D010781:Photography; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000175:diagnosis*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult
references: Swanson E. A retrospective photometric study of 82 published reports of mastopexy and breast reduction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1282–1301
references: Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39:175–191
references: Swanson E. Five-year prospective outcome study in 325 cosmetic breast surgery patients (Abstract). Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122(Suppl):112
references: Ayeni O, Dickson L, Ignacy TA, Thoma A. A systematic review of power and sample size reporting in randomized controlled trials within plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130:78e–86e
references: Brandon HJ, Jerina KL, Wolf CJ, Young VL. In vivo aging characteristics of silicone gel breast implants compared to lot-matched controls. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109:1927–1933
references: Pitanguy I. Surgical treatment of breast hypertrophy. Br J Plast Surg. 1967;20:78–85
references: Dinner MI, Chait LA. Preventing the high-riding nipple after McKissock breast reductions. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1977;59:330–333
references: Reus WF, Mathes SJ. Preservation of projection after reduction mammaplasty: Long-term follow-up of the inferior pedicle technique. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1988;82:644–652
references: Regnault P. Breast ptosis. Clin Plast Surg. 1976;3:193–203
references: Swanson E. Photometric evaluation of inframammary crease level after cosmetic breast surgery. Aesthet Surg J. 2010;30:832–837
references: Ramselaar JM. Precision in breast reduction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1988;82:631–643
references: Westreich M. Anthropomorphic breast measurement: Protocol and results in 50 women with aesthetically perfect breasts and clinical application. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997;100:468–479
references: Aubert V. Hypertrophie mammaire de la puberté. Résection partielle restauratrice. Arch Franco-Belges de Chir. 1923;3:284–289
references: Kraske H. Die Operation der atrophischen und hypertrophi- schen Hängebrust. Munch Med Wochenschr. 1923;60:672
references: Lexer E. Zur Operation der Mammahypertrophie und der Hängebrust. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1925;51:26
references: Hall-Findlay EJ. The three breast dimensions: Analysis and effecting change. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:1632–1642
references: Hall-Findlay EJ. Pedicles in vertical breast reduction and mastopexy. Clin Plast Surg. 2002;29:379–391
references: Baroudi R, Lewis JR. The augmentation-reduction mammaplasty. Clin Plast Surg. 1976;3:301–308
references: Regnault P, Daniel RK, Tirkanits B. The minus-plus mastopexy. Clin Plast Surg. 1988;15:595–600
references: Tepper OM, Choi M, Small K, et al. An innovative three-dimensional approach to defining the anatomical changes occurring after short scar-medial pedicle reduction mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:1875–1885
references: Sarwer DB, Gibbons LM, Magee L, et al. A prospective, multi-site investigation of patient satisfaction and psychosocial status following cosmetic surgery. Aesthet Surg J. 2005;25:263–269
references: Rohrich RJ, Thornton JF, Jakubietz RG, Jakubietz MG, Grünert JG. The limited scar mastopexy: Current concepts and approaches to correct breast ptosis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114:1622–1630
references: Rohrich RJ. So you want to be better: The role of evidence-based medicine in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:1395–1398