Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2019.00906
Attachment distribution of pectoral muscle origins identified in dual-plane breast implant insertion
Background Implant-based dual-plane augmentation mammoplasty requires accurate separation of the pectoralis major muscle (PMM) at its origins. The authors identified the PMM origins during breast reconstruction surgery with the goal of providing additional information on subpectoral implant insertion for reconstructive or aesthetic purposes.
Methods This study was conducted on 67 patients who underwent breast reconstruction surgery at the breast center of our hospital between November 2016 and June 2018. In total, 34 left and 39 right hemithoraces were examined. The left and right hemithoraces were each divided into 15 zones to determine the percentage of PMM attachments in each zone. The distribution of PMM origins in each zone was examined to identify any statistically significant differences.
Results There were no statistically significant differences in the origins of the PMM between the right and left hemithoraces. The percentage of attachments increased moving from the fourth to the sixth rib and from the lateral to the medial aspect.
Conclusions The anatomical findings of this study could be used as a reference for accurate dissection of the origins of the PMM for the preparation of the subpectoral pocket for subpectoral implant placement.
This study was supported by a grant from the clinical research fund of Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital in 2016.
This article was presented at the 7th Research and Reconstruction Forum (R&R), on April 20-21, 2017, in Daejeon, Korea.
Publication History
Received: 16 July 2019
Accepted: 08 January 2020
Article published online:
22 May 2022
© 2020. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
REFERENCES
- 1 Spear SL, Bulan EJ, Venturi ML. Breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 114: 73e-81e
- 2 Tebbetts JB. Dual plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant-soft-tissue relationships in a wide range of breast types. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 107: 1255-72
- 3 Hidalgo DA. Breast augmentation: choosing the optimal incision, implant, and pocket plane. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105: 2202-16
- 4 Moore KL, Dalley AF. Clinically oriented anatomy. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins;; 1999
- 5 Czerny V. Plastischer Ersatz der Brustdrüse durch ein Lipom. Zentral Chir 1895; 22: 72
- 6 Cronin TD, Gerow FJ. Augmentation mammoplasty: a new “natural feel” prosthesis. Transactions of the Third International Congress of Plastic Surgery; 1963 Oct 13-18; Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Excerpta Medica Foundation 41-9
- 7 Sohn BK, Chung YJ, Kim G. et al. Submuscular periareolar approach to augmentation mammoplasty in Korean women. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2000; 24: 455-60
- 8 Anson BJ, Jamieson RW, O’conor VJ. et al. The pectoral muscles; an anatomical study of 400 body-halves. Q Bull Northwest Univ Med Sch 1953; 27: 211-8
- 9 Sanchez ER, Sanchez R, Moliver C. Anatomic relationship of the pectoralis major and minor muscles: a cadaveric study. Aesthet Surg J 2014; 34: 258-63
- 10 Lesavoy MA, Trussler AP, Dickinson BP. Difficulties with subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty and its correction: the role of subglandular site change in revision aesthetic breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 125: 363-71
- 11 Codner MA, Cohen AT, Hester TR. Complications in breast augmentation: prevention and correction. Clin Plast Surg 2001; 28: 587-95