Estimation of implant size based on mammograms in immediate breast reconstruction
- 33 Downloads
Implant size selection is a critical component of preoperative planning for immediate breast reconstruction. This paper introduces a novel formula, based on preoperative mammograms, for estimating implant volume in patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction.
A retrospective analysis of 115 consecutive patients with immediate breast reconstruction following skin or nipple sparing mastectomy was performed. A calculated implant size was obtained using the formula, calculated implant size (ml) = π × height (cm) × [base width (cm) − 3]. The calculations were performed independently by two surgeons and based on the ipsilateral preoperative mammogram. The calculated implant size was compared with the actual implant size used during the surgery and results were analysed.
The mean calculated and actual implant sizes were 376.03 ml and 324.49 ml, respectively. There was no difference found between calculated and actual implant sizes (t = − 1.704, p = 0.090), and there was a strong positive correlation between calculated and actual implant sizes (r = 0.7748, p < 0.00001). Further analysis revealed greater accuracy of the formula in patients with an estimated implant size of less than 350 ml, and a tendency to overestimate implant size in breasts with an estimated volume of more than 350 ml.
The mammography-based formula is a simple and practical method to estimate implant size preoperatively. Ultimately, implant selection for the best possible cosmetic outcome is a multifactorial process, of which breast volume is one consideration. This formula can serve as a useful adjunct for preoperative assessment.
Level of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic study.
KeywordsImplant selection Breast implant formula Immediate breast reconstruction Preoperative planning Mammography
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Yan Yu Tan, Howard Chu, Mihir Chandarana, Sadaf Jafferbhoy, Sankaran Narayanan, Sekhar Marla and Soni Soumian declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Formal patient consent is not required for this retrospective analysis.
- 3.Vorstenbosch J, Islur A (2017) Correlation of prediction and actual outcome of three-dimensional simulation in breast augmentation using a cloud-based program. Aesthetic Plast Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-017-0830-2
- 12.Kin H, Mun GH, Wiraatmadja ES et al (2015) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging-based volumetry for immediate breast reconstruction. Aesthetic Plast Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-015-0493-9
- 18.Gladilin E, Gabrielova B, Montemurro P, Hedén P (2011) Customized planning of augmentation mammaplasty with silicon implants using three-dimensional optical body scans and biomechanical modeling of soft tissue outcome. Aesthetic Plast Surg 35:494–501Google Scholar
- 19.Stan C, Bratu T, Chioibas R, Mastacaneanu M, Gyebnar V (2009) The contribution of computerized system in selection of the implant for breast augmentation. Timisoara Med J 60:140–144Google Scholar
- 27.Holland K, Sechopoulos I, Mann RM, den Heeten GJ, van Gils CH, Karssemeijer N (2017) Influence of breast compression pressure on the performance of population-based mammography screening. Breast Cancer Res. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-017-0917-3