Abstract
Regardless of progress in surgical procedures and breast implant technology, augmentation mammaplasty remains a technique in development. The decision as to the plane of placement and which type of implant to use is an exercise in balancing a number of objective and subjective factors. Aesthetic expectations, patient’s physical individuality, surgeon’s experience, lifestyle factors and implant — soft tissue relations, all influence the decision process, surgical planning and outcome [5, 12, 13]. To date, there is no consensus concerning the best procedure. The main advantages of the technique should include safety, reproducibility and acceptable complication rates. Probably, these goals are not achievable by any single procedure and each technique has advantages and limitations.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- Sentinel Lymph Node
- Breast Augmentation
- Pectoralis Muscle
- Sentinel Lymph Node Detection
- Inframammary Fold
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Dowden RV (1997) Subcutaneous fibrous banding after transaxillary subpectoral endoscopic breast augmentation. Plast Recons Surg 99:257
Ghaderl B, Hoenig JM, Dado D, Angelats J, Vandevender D (2002) Incidence of Intercostobrachial nerve injury after transaxillary breast augmentation. Aesth Surg J 22:26–31
Goes JC, Landecker A (2003) Optimizing outcomes in breast augmentation: seven years of experience with the subfascial plane. Aesth Plast Surg 27:178–186
Graf RM, Bernardes A, Auersvald A, Damasio RC (2000) Subfascial endoscopic transaxillary augmentation mammaplasty. Aesth Plast Surg 24:216–221
Hidalgo DA (2000) Breast augmentation: choosing the optimal incision, implant, and pocket plane. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:2202–2012
Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, Moffat F, Klimberg VS, Shriver C, Feldman S, Kusminsky R, Gadd M, Kuhn J, Harlow S, Beitsch P (1998) The sentinel node in breast cancer-A multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med 339:941–949
Maximovich SP (1996) Fibrous bands following subpectoral endoscopic breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 97: 1304
Munhoz AM, Aldrighi C, Buschpiegel C, Ono C, Montag E, Fells K, Arruda E, Sturtz G, Kovac P, Filassi JR, Gemperli R, Ferreira MC (2005) The feasibility of sentinel lymph node detection in patients with previous transaxillary implant breast augmentation: preliminary results. Aesth Plast Surg 29:163–169
Munhoz AM, Aldrighi C, Buschpiegel C, Ono C, Montag E, Fells K, Arruda E, Filassi JR, Gemperli R, Ferreira MC (2007) The influence of subfascial transaxillary breast augmentation in axillary lymphatic drainage patterns and sentinel lymph node detection. Ann Plast Surg 58:141–149
Munhoz AM, Fells K, Arruda E, Montag E, Okada A, Aldrighi C, Aldrighi JM, Gemperli R, Ferreira MC (2006) Subfascial transaxillary breast augmentation without endoscopic assistance: technical aspects and outcome. Aesth Plast Surg (in press)
Serra-Renom J, Garrido MF, Yoon T (2005) Augmentation mammaplasty with anatomic soft, cohesive silicone implant using the transaxillary approach at a subfascial level with endoscopic assistance. Plast Reconstr Surg 116:640–649
Solomon JA, Barton FE (1997) Augmentation mammaplasty. Selected Read Plast Surg 8:1–11
Spear SL, Bulan EJ, Venturi ML (2004) Breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 114:73–81
Tebbetts JB (1984) Transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: long-term follow-up and refinements. Plast Reconstr Surg 74:636–642
Tebbetts JB (2004) Does fascia provide additional meaningful coverage over a breast implant? Plast Reconstr Surg 113:777–778
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gemperli, R., Munhoz, A.M. (2008). Transaxillary Subfascial Breast Augmentation: Optimizing Outcomes. In: Eisenmann-Klein, M., Neuhann-Lorenz, C. (eds) Innovations in Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-46326-9_49
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-46326-9_49
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-46321-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46326-9
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)