Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 1–6 | Cite as

Menstrual Cycle-Related Fluctuations in Breast Volume Measured Using Three-Dimensional Imaging: Implications for Volumetric Evaluation in Breast Augmentation

  • Chenglong Wang
  • Jie Luan
  • Hao Cheng
  • Lin Chen
  • Zifei Li
  • Adriana C. Panayi
  • Chunjun LiuEmail author
Original Article Breast Surgery



Breast volume is a key parameter of breast measurement in breast augmentation. However, the correlation between menstrual cycle phases and variation in breast volume has not been well studied.


Young female patients with regular menstrual cycles underwent eight three-dimensional imaging scans during a single menstrual cycle from November 2017 to January 2018. Breast volumetric difference at each timepoint and basic breast volume were measured for each subject. Preovulatory phase and postovulatory phase values were compared using an unpaired t test. A Pearson’s linear correlated analysis was performed to identify the correlation between the basic breast volume and maximum range of breast volumetric difference during the menstrual cycle.


Thirteen patients (26 breasts) met the inclusion criteria. During the menstrual cycle, the breast volumetric difference showed first a rising trend followed by a fall. A significant difference in the breast volumetric difference between the preovulatory phase and postovulatory phase (− 19.6 ± 2.1 ml pre-ovulation vs. − 6.9 ± 3.3 ml post-ovulation, p = 0.002) was noted. There was a positive linear association between breast volume and maximum range of breast volumetric difference when a Pearson correlation was used (r = 0.45, p = 0.021).


The breast volume fluctuates during the menstrual cycle, and there is a significant difference between the preovulatory phase and postovulatory phase for breast volumetric change. The influence of the menstrual cycle on breast volume should be taken into consideration by plastic surgeons performing breast augmentation.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors


Menstrual cycle Breast volume Three-dimensional imaging Mammaplasty 



This study was supported by Capital’s Funds for Health Improvement and Research (No. 2016-2-4041), PUMC Youth Fund & the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 3332015156), to Dr. Chunjun Liu; and CAMS Initiative for Innovative Medicine (CAMS-I2M) (No. 2017-I2M-3-006) to Dr. Jie Luan.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Choppin SB, Wheat JS, Gee M et al (2016) The accuracy of breast volume measurement methods: a systematic review. Breast 28:121–129Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tepper OM, Unger JG, Small KH et al (2010) Mammometrics: the standardization of aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 125(1):393–400Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu C, Ji K, Sun J et al (2014) Does respiration influence breast volumetric change measurement with the three-dimensional scanning technique? Aesthetic Plast Surg 38(1):115–119Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Henseler H, Ju X, Ayoub A et al (2013) The importance of the pose in three-dimensional imaging of the ptotic breast. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66(11):1551–1556Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R et al (2007) Comparison between breast volume measurement using 3D surface imaging and classical techniques. Breast 16(2):137–145Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ramakrishnan R, Khan SA, Badve S (2002) Morphological changes in breast tissue with menstrual cycle. Mod Pathol 15(12):1348–1356Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen JH, Chen WP, Chan S et al (2013) Correlation of endogenous hormonal levels, fibroglandular tissue volume and percent density measured using 3D MRI during one menstrual cycle. Ann Oncol 24(9):2329–2335Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chan S, Su MY, Lei FJ et al (2011) Menstrual cycle-related fluctuations in breast density measured by using three-dimensional MR imaging. Radiology 261(3):744–751Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang C, Luan J (2018) Magnetic resonance imaging versus 3-dimensional laser scanning for breast volume assessment after breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 80(5):592Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Choppin SB, Probst H, Goyal A et al (2013) Breast volume calculation using a low-cost scanning system. In: 4th International conference and exhibition on 3d body scanning technologies: 2013. Hometrica Consulting, Long Beach.
  11. 11.
    General Assembly of the World Medical A (2014) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. J Am Coll Dent 81(3):14–18Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lopez MM, Castillo AC, Kaltwasser K et al (2016) Surgical timing and the menstrual cycle affect wound healing in young breast reduction patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 137(2):406–410Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu C, Luan J, Mu L et al (2010) The role of three-dimensional scanning technique in evaluation of breast asymmetry in breast augmentation: a 100-case study. Plast Reconstr Surg 126(6):2125–2132Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu C, Luan J, Ji K et al (2012) Measuring volumetric change after augmentation mammaplasty using a three-dimensional scanning technique: an innovative method. Aesthetic Plast Surg 36(5):1134–1139Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R et al (2006) New aspects of breast volume measurement using 3-dimensional surface imaging. Ann Plast Surg 57(6):602–610Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reed BG, Carr BR (2000) The normal menstrual cycle and the control of ovulation. In: De Groot LJ, Chrousos G, Dungan K, Feingold KR, Grossman A, Hershman JM, Koch C, Korbonits M, McLachlan R, New M et al. (eds) Endotext. South DartmouthGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hussain Z, Roberts N, Whitehouse GH et al (1999) Estimation of breast volume and its variation during the menstrual cycle using MRI and stereology. Br J Radiol 72(855):236–245Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wesselius TS, Verhulst AC, Vreeken RD et al (2018) Accuracy of three software applications for breast volume calculations from 3D surface images. Plast Reconstr Surg. Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pike MC, Spicer DV, Dahmoush L et al (1993) Estrogens, progestogens, normal breast cell proliferation, and breast cancer risk. Epidemiol Rev 15(1):17–35Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen JH, Chan S, Yeh DC et al (2013) Response of bilateral breasts to the endogenous hormonal fluctuation in a menstrual cycle evaluated using 3D MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 31(4):538–544Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ et al (2007) Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356(3):227–236Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Largo RD, Tchang LA, Mele V et al (2014) Efficacy, safety and complications of autologous fat grafting to healthy breast tissue: a systematic review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 67(4):437–448Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eder M, Waldenfels F, Sichtermann M et al (2011) Three-dimensional evaluation of breast contour and volume changes following subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty over 6 months. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 64(9):1152–1160Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jernstrom H, Olsson H (1997) Breast size in relation to endogenous hormone levels, body constitution, and oral contraceptive use in healthy nulligravid women aged 19–25 years. Am J Epidemiol 145(7):571–580Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chenglong Wang
    • 1
  • Jie Luan
    • 1
  • Hao Cheng
    • 1
  • Lin Chen
    • 1
  • Zifei Li
    • 1
  • Adriana C. Panayi
    • 2
  • Chunjun Liu
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Aesthetic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery, Plastic Surgery HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
  2. 2.Tissue Engineering and Wound Healing Laboratory, Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women’s HospitalHarvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations