Alsanabani, J., Algaradi, G. (2020). Superior Pedicle Reduction Mammoplasty: A Safe and Reliable Tecnique in Breast Hypertrophy. The Egyptian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 44(3), 445-451. doi: 10.21608/ejprs.2020.122301
Jamila Ali Alsanabani; GAmila Ahmed Algaradi. "Superior Pedicle Reduction Mammoplasty: A Safe and Reliable Tecnique in Breast Hypertrophy". The Egyptian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 44, 3, 2020, 445-451. doi: 10.21608/ejprs.2020.122301
Alsanabani, J., Algaradi, G. (2020). 'Superior Pedicle Reduction Mammoplasty: A Safe and Reliable Tecnique in Breast Hypertrophy', The Egyptian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 44(3), pp. 445-451. doi: 10.21608/ejprs.2020.122301
Alsanabani, J., Algaradi, G. Superior Pedicle Reduction Mammoplasty: A Safe and Reliable Tecnique in Breast Hypertrophy. The Egyptian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2020; 44(3): 445-451. doi: 10.21608/ejprs.2020.122301
Superior Pedicle Reduction Mammoplasty: A Safe and Reliable Tecnique in Breast Hypertrophy
1The Department of General Surgery, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Sana'a University; Yemen
2Department of General Surgery, Al-Kuwait Hospital
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate the superior pedicle technique in reduction mammoplasty of breast hypertrophy. Background: Breast reduction is a common aesthetic surgical procedure. It aims not only at bringing the size of the breast proportionate to the build of the individual, but also to decrease the discomfort caused by massive, ill-shaped and hanging breasts. The operative procedure reduces the breast tissue mass and enhances aesthetic appearance No technique has been shown to be superior. The superior pedicle technique preserves superior and medial breast fullness while providing appropriate resection of the breast parenchyma to reduce symptoms and produce a smaller, lifted breast with more youthful appearance. Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of eighty (80) consecutive patients between September 2015 and October 2019. All the patients underwent bilateral breast reductions. Preoperative assessment including history, physical examination, breast ultrasound and mammography. Also preoperative breast measurements, mainly mid-clavicle point to NAC distance were taken. Standard breast photography was also carried out preoperative and 4 weeks postoperative. All patients were followed 1, 3 and 6 months postoperative for complications and patient satisfaction. Results: Patient's age ranged from 20 to 55 years old. About 71.3% of the patients complained of preoperative physical problems. The mean distance from mid-clavicle to nipple in our cases was 33.2 (19-39) cm. The mean length of nipple transposition was 13.2cm, ranging from 3 to 18cm. The mean weight of breast tissue resection was 924g, ranging from 190 to 1800g. The overall postoperative complications were 20%, in the form of T-junction wound dehiscence (10%), mild soft tissue infection (3.8%), asymmetry (2.5%), unilateral partial NAC necrosis (2.5%) and unilateral complete NAC necrosis (1.3%). 91.3% of the cases were satisfied, 5% acceptable and 3,8% dissatisfied regarding improvement of symptoms and size, shape and symmetry of the breasts. Conclusion: The superior pedicle technique is simple, safe and reliable technique in reduction mammoplasty with maintaining upper and medial fullness and giving good aesthetic results.
1- Chopra K., Tadisina K.K. and Singh D.P.: Breast reduction mammoplasty, 13: ic 59. eCollection, 2013. 2- Zidan A.A., Azzm E.Z. and El-Kafrawy H.Y.: Key hole pattern with superior-medial pedicle in large breast reduction. Egypt, J. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., Vol. 43, No. 3, October: 463-468, 2019. 3- Dancey A., Khan M., Dawson J. and Peart F.: Gigantomastia - A classification and review of the literature. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesth. Surg.,, 61: 493-502, 2008. 4- Dafyd D.H., Roehl K.R., Phillips L.G., Dancey A., Peart F. and Shokrollahi K.: Redefining Gigantomastia. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesth. Surg., 64: 160-163, 2011. 5- Cho M.J., Yang J.H., Choi H.G., Kim W.S., Yu Y.B. and Park K.S.: An idiopathic Gigantomastia. Ann. Surg. Treat. Res., 88: 166-169, 2015. 6- Gradinger G.P.: Is there virtue in versatility in reduction mammoplasty? Aesth. Surg. J., 17 (5): 308-315, 1997. 7- Stevens W.G., Cohen R., Schantz S.A., et al.: Laser assisted breast reduction: A safe and effective alternative. A study of 367 patients. Aesth. Surg. J., 6 (4): 432-439, 2006. 8- Aufricht G.: Mammoplasty for pendulous breasts. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. J., 4: 13. [PubMed] [Google Scholar], 1949. 9- Arie G.: Una nueva tecnica de mastoplastia. Rev. Iber Latino Am. Cir. Plast., 3: 28, 1957. 10- Pitanguy I.: Surgical correction of breast hypertrophy. Br. J. Plast. Surg., 20: 78, 1967. 11- Weiner D.L. , Aiache A.E., Silver L. and Tittiranonda T.: A single dermal pedicle for nipple transposition in subcutaneous mastectomy, reduction mammoplasty, or mastopexy. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 51 (2): 115-20, 1973. 12- Nadeau M.H., Gould D.J., Macias L.H., Spring M.A. and Grant Stevens W.: Superior pedicle technique of reduction mammoplasty: A stepwise approach. Aesth. Surg. J., 35 (1): 94-104, 2015. 13- Nuzzi L.C., Firriolo J.M., Pike C.M., Cerrato F.E., et al.: The effect of reduction mammoplasty on quality of life in adolescents with macromastia. Pediatrics, 140 (5) e 20171103; Dol : //doi.org/10.1542/peds, 2017. 14- Fahmy K., Salama T., Aly A., Youssef T. and Jamal A.: Superomedial pedicle VS. Inferior pedicle techniques in reduction mammoplasty. Surgery Curr. Res., 8: 3, 2019. 15- Miller A.P., Zacher J.B., Berggren F.B., Falcone R.E. and Monk J.: Breast reduction for symptomatic macromastia: can objective predictors for operative success be identified? Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 95: 77-83, 1995. 16- Gonzalez F., Walton R.L., Shafer B., Matory W.E. Jr. and Borah G.L.: Reduction mammoplasty improves symptoms of macromastia. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 91: 1270-1276, 1993. 17- Thoma A., Spraque S., Veltri K., Duk E. and Furlong W.: Aprocpective study of patients undergoing breast reduction surgery: Health-related quality of life and clinical outcomes. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 120: 13-26, 2007. 18- Spector J.A. and Karp N.S.: Reduction mammoplasty a significant improvement at any size. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 120: 845 -850, 2007. 19- Wagner D.S. and Alfonso D.R.: The influence of obesity and volume of resection on success in reduction mammoplasty: An outcomes study. Plast Reconstr Surg., 115: 1034-1038, 2005. 20- Fox J.W.: Superior pedicle reduction mammoplasty. Aesth. Surg. J., 25 (4): 406-412, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1011 j.asi2005.05.010 21- Wettestein R., Christofides E., Psaras G. and Hander Y.: Superior pedicle breast reduction for hypertrophy with massive ptosis, J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesth. Surg., Apr., 64 (4), 500-7, 2011. doi: 10, 1016/j.bjps. 2010.05.018. Epub 2010 Jun 26. 22- Fino P., Di Taranto G.M. and Scuderi N.T.: Surgical therapy of breast hypertrophy : a comparison of complications and satisfaction rate in large and small superior pedicle custom-made reduction mammoplasty. European review for medical and pharmacological sciences, 20: 4411-4415, 2016. 23- Al-Shaham A.A.: Pedicle viability as the determinant factor for conversion to free nipple graft. Can. J. Plast. Surg., 18 (1) : e1-e4, 2010. doi: 10.4172/plastic-surgery. 1000643. 24- Brown R.H., Siy R., Khan K. and Izaddoost S.: The Superomedial pedicle wise-pattern breast reduction: Reproducible, reliable and resilient. Semin Plast. Surg., 29 (2): 94-101, 2015. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1549052. 25- Ulusal G.B. and Alber: In pursuit of effective volume reduction and enhanced aesthetics for treatment of Gigantomastia using superior dermoglandular pedicle, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 42: 412-421, 2018. 26- Manrekas A.D., Zambacos G.J., Anastasopoulous A. and Hapsas D.A.: Reduction mammoplasty with inferior pedicle technique: Early and late complications in 371 patients. British J. Plast. Surg., 49: 442-446, 1996. 27- Davis G.M., Ringler S.L., Short K., Sherrick D. and Bengston B.P.: Reduction mammoplasty: Long efficacy, morbidity,and patient satisfaction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 96: 1106-10, 1995. 28- Dabbah A., Lehman J.A., Parker M.G., Tantria D. and Wagner D.S.: Reduction mammoplasty: An outcome analysis. Ann. Plast. Surg., 35: 337-41, 1955. 29- Cunningham B.L., Grear A.J., Kerrigan C.L., et al.: Analysis of breast reduction comlications derived from the BRAVO study. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 115-1604. [PubMed] [Google Scholar], 2005. 30- Schatt J., Binter A. and Rab M.: Reduction mammoplasty with superior pedicle - a retrospective 10 year follow-up analysis of 33 patients. Handchir Mikrochir Plast. Chir. Dec., 46 (6): 325-9, 2014. doi: 10.105s/s-0034-1385934. Epub 2014 Nov 20. 31- Baslaim M.M., Al Amoudi S.A., Hafiz M., Al Hazmi W.M., Salman B.A. and Al-Amoudi M.K.: The safety, cosmetic outcome and patient satisfaction after inferior pedicle reduction mammoplasty for significant macromastia. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. Glob Open., 6 (6): e 1798. Published Online 2018 Jun. 19, 2018. 32- Saleem L. and John J.R.: Unfavorable results following reduction mammoplasty. Indian J. Plast. Surg., May - Aug., 46 (2): 401-407, 2013
View on SCiNiTO
Top