Advertisement

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 43, Issue 4, pp 899–904 | Cite as

Winged Ribs: An Underestimated Problem That May Compromise Breast Augmentation Outcomes

  • Patricio AndradesEmail author
  • Diego Quispe
  • Carlos Dominguez
  • Rocío Jara
  • Juan Pablo Cisternas
  • German Lobos
  • Claudia Albornoz
  • Stefan Danilla
  • Cristian Erazo
  • Sergio Sepulveda
Original Article Breast Surgery

Abstract

Chest wall shape is an important aspect to consider when planning a breast augmentation. Minor chest wall deformities are usually underestimated by the patient and surgeon and may compromise postoperative outcomes. Lower costal cartilage dysmorphia or winged rib is one of these minor underestimated chest wall deformities characterized by a visible and palpable cartilaginous prominence under the inframammary fold and causes discomfort in patients decreasing the satisfaction with the breast augmentation surgery. For these patients, the author utilized an innovative surgical technique that allows resection of the protruding cartilages and placement of breast implants through the same surgical incision. Six patients with winged ribs underwent breast augmentation and costal cartilage resection via this method and there were no intraoperative or early postoperative complications, and all patients were satisfied with the aesthetical result after 6 months of follow-up. The presented surgical technique has a short learning curve with excellent postoperative results. Cases are presented to demonstrate the improved postoperative chest wall contour combined with breast augmentation outcome.

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 www.springer.com/00266.

Keywords

Winged ribs Breast augmentation Chest wall deformities Thoracic wall contour 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Human and Animal Rights

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.

Informed Consent

For this type of study, informed consent is required; all the participants gave their informed consent in writing for the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Plastic Surgery Statistics (2018) American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Agost. https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2018/plastic-surgery-statistics-report-2018.pdf. Accessed Aug 2018
  2. 2.
    Lista F, Ahmad J (2013) Evidence-based medicine: augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(6):1684–1696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ors S (2017) Incidence and classification of chest wall deformities in breast augmentation patients. Aesthetic Plast Surg 41(6):1280–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hidalgo DA, Spector JA (2014) Breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 133(4):567e–583eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Acastello E, Garrido P (2009) Congenital chest wall malformations: 22 years experience in a childrens center. Rev Med Clin Condes 20(6):758–767Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Acastello E, Maljuf F, Garrido P, Barbosa LM, Peredo A (2003) Sternal Clef: a surgical opportunity. J Pediatr Surg 38(2):178–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Acastello E(2006) Patologías de la pared torácica en pediatría. Editorial El Ateneo, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eduardo Acastello PG (2011) Congenital malformations of the torácica wall. buenos airesGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Donnelly LF, Frush DP, Foss JN, O’Hara SM, Bisset GS (1999) Anterior chest wall: frequency of anatomic variations in children. Radiology 212(3):837–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wolter TP, Lorenz S, Neuhann-Lorenz C (2010) Aesthetic breast augmentation and thoracic deformities. Aesthet Plast Surg 34(5):612–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Torre M, Rapuzzi G, Jasonni V, Varela P (2012) Chest wall deformities: an overview on classification and surgical options. Topics in Thorac Surg.  https://doi.org/10.5772/25950 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ma IT, Rebecca AM, Notrica DM, McMahon LE, Jaroszewski DE (2015) Pectus excavatum in adult women: repair and the impact of prior or concurrent breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(2):303e–312eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moscona RA, Fodor L (2011) How to perform breast augmentation safely for a pectus excavatum patient. Aesth Plast Surg. 35(2):198–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bayram Y, Zor F, Karagoz H, Kulahci Y, Afifi AM, Ozturk S (2015) Challenging breast augmentations: The influence of preoperative anatomical features on the final result. Aesthetic surgery journal. 36(3):313–320.  https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjv181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Obermeyer RJ, Goretsky MJ (2012) Chest wall deformities in pediatric surgery. Surg Clin North Am 92(3):669–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patricio Andrades
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Diego Quispe
    • 1
  • Carlos Dominguez
    • 1
  • Rocío Jara
    • 1
  • Juan Pablo Cisternas
    • 1
  • German Lobos
    • 1
  • Claudia Albornoz
    • 1
  • Stefan Danilla
    • 1
  • Cristian Erazo
    • 1
  • Sergio Sepulveda
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of SurgeryHospital Clínico Universidad de ChileIndependencia, SantiagoChile
  2. 2.Department of Maxillofacial SurgeryHospital del Trabajador de SantiagoSantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations