Abstract
The most common approach for breast augmentation and for the revision approach is inframammary. This classical approach has several advantages. There is a good overview of the anatomical structures, which are then easily definable; there is a short approach to the inframammary fold; and there is a chance of meticulous hemostasis by direct view. The author discusses the preoperative examination, surgical technique, and complications.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Cronin TD, Gerow FJ. Augmentation mammoplasty: a new “natural feel” prosthesis. In: Transactions of the 3rd international congress of plastic surgery. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica; 1964. p. 41–9.
Vasquez B, Given KS, Housten GC. Breast augmentation: review of subglandular and submuscular implantation. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1987;11:101–5.
Hoehler H. Breast augmentation: axillary approach. Br J Plast Surg. 1973;26(4):373–6.
Giebler FRG. Complications related to the implants in Europe. Presented at the 28th annual workshop, the American Society of Cosmetic Breast Surgery (ASCBS), Newport Beach, 2012.
Stoff-Khalili MA, Scholze R, Morgan WR, Metcalf JD. Subfascial periareolar augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114(5):1289–91.
Shiffman M. Breast augmentation: intraareolar approach. In: Shiffman M, editor. Breast augmentation. Berlin: Springer; 2009. p. 209–14.
Würinger E, Mader N, Posch E, Holle J. Nerve and vessel supplying ligamentous suspension of the mammary gland. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;101(6):1486–93.
Agris J, Dingman RO, Wilensky RJ. A dissector for the transaxillary approach in augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1976;57(1):10–3.
Moyer HR, Ghazi B, Saunders N. Contamination in smooth gel breast implant placement: testing a funnel versus digital insertion technique in a cadaver model. Aesthet Surg J. 2012;32(2):194–9.
Eckert P. Implant injector for retropectoral augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987;80(4):622–5.
McCurdy JA. Relationship between spherical fibrous capsular contracture and mammary prosthesis type. Am J Cosm Surg. 1990;7:235.
Tebbetts JB. A surgical perspective from two decades of breast augmentation: toward state of the art in 2001. Clin Plast Surg. 2001;28(3):425–34.
Lavigne E, Holowaty EJ, Pan SY, Xie L, Villeneuve PJ, Morrison H, Brisson J. Do breast implants adversely affect prognosis among those subsequently diagnosed with breast cancer? Findings from an extended follow- up of a Canadian cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012;21(10):1868–76.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Giebler, F.R.G. (2015). Subglandular Breast Augmentation. In: Mugea, T.T., Shiffman, M.A. (eds) Aesthetic Surgery of the Breast. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43407-9_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43407-9_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-43406-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-43407-9
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)