Three-Dimensional Simulated Images in Breast Augmentation Surgery: An Investigation of Patients’ Satisfaction and the Correlation between Prediction and Actual Outcome

Background: Breast augmentation is one of the most commonly performed operations. Three-dimensional outcome simulation can be used to predict and demonstrate for the patient what the planned operation aims to achieve in terms of size and shape. However, there are still few studies in the literature that look at how close the simulation is to the actual postoperative result and how patients perceive the accuracy and usefulness of the simulation. Methods: A prospective series of 150 patients underwent breast augmentation following consultation with the aid of three-dimensional simulation images. These patients were evaluated with a questionnaire 6 months postoperatively. A retrospective chart review of 52 patients whose three-dimensional simulations were compared with the postoperative photographs were evaluated and graded by an independent panel of investigators. Results: The independent panel graded the overall similarity of the three-dimensional simulations to the actual breasts with a total average score ± SD of 7.5 ± 0.80 (range, 4.5 to 8.9) using a visual analogue scale ranging from 1 to 10. The highest average score was given to projection, breast width, and height (7.8); the lowest average score was given to intermammary distance (7.0). Eighty-six percent of patients felt the simulated image was very accurate in predicting the actual result of their breasts. Conclusions: Patients prefer a center that offers three-dimensional imaging technology; they feel that the simulation is very accurate and helps them very much in choosing the implant; if they could go back in time, they would choose the same implant again. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

[1]  M. Doblaré,et al.  A finite element model to accurately predict real deformations of the breast. , 2008, Medical engineering & physics.

[2]  O. Tepper,et al.  Three‐Dimensional Imaging Provides Valuable Clinical Data to Aid in Unilateral Tissue Expander‐Implant Breast Reconstruction , 2008, The breast journal.

[3]  Jie Luan,et al.  The Role of Three-Dimensional Scanning Technique in Evaluation of Breast Asymmetry in Breast Augmentation: A 100-Case Study , 2010, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[4]  E. Bozonnet,et al.  Apport de l’informatique à la sélection des implants mammaires ou à la fabrication sur mesure des implants thoraciques , 2010 .

[5]  Measuring Volumetric Change After Augmentation Mammaplasty Using a Three-Dimensional Scanning Technique: An Innovative Method , 2012, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

[6]  O. Tepper,et al.  Virtual 3-dimensional modeling as a valuable adjunct to aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery. , 2006, American journal of surgery.

[7]  Hamid Soltanian-Zadeh,et al.  Web-based interactive 2D/3D medical image processing and visualization software , 2010, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[8]  H. Becker.  The role of three-dimensional scanning technique in evaluation of breast asymmetry. , 2012, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[9]  T. Carey,et al.  A Critical Guide to Case Series Reports , 2003, Spine.

[10]  Raphael Sinna,et al.  [Evaluation of 3D numerisation with structured light projection in breast surgery]. , 2009, Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique.

[11]  Eric Swanson,et al.  A Measurement System for Evaluation of Shape Changes and Proportions after Cosmetic Breast Surgery , 2012, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

[12]  Hans-Günther Machens,et al.  Three-Dimensional Evaluation of Breast Augmentation and the Influence of Anatomic and Round Implants on Operative Breast Shape Changes , 2012, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

[13]  Lei Cao,et al.  [Development of a computer-aided system for augmentation mammaplasty simulation]. , 2007, Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University.

[14]  Hans-Günther Machens,et al.  Three-dimensional evaluation of breast contour and volume changes following subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty over 6 months. , 2011, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[15]  David Mordaunt,et al.  Four-dimensional breast imaging, part II: clinical implementation and validation of a computer imaging system for breast augmentation planning. , 2011, Aesthetic surgery journal.

[16]  Evgeny Gladilin,et al.  Customized Planning of Augmentation Mammaplasty with Silicon Implants Using Three-Dimensional Optical Body Scans and Biomechanical Modeling of Soft Tissue Outcome , 2011, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

[17]  J. P. Chavoin,et al.  « Morphosein » : gestion d'une base de données patients pour le choix objectif du volume de l'implant dans les hypotrophies mammaires , 2005 .

[18]  John B Tebbetts,et al.  A system for breast implant selection based on patient tissue characteristics and implant-soft tissue dynamics. , 2002, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[19]  J. Tebbetts.  Dual Plane Breast Augmentation: Optimizing Implant-Soft-Tissue Relationships in a Wide Range of Breast Types , 2006, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[20]  S. Carton,et al.  Apport de l'imagerie 3D à la chirurgie mammaire : étude préliminaire , 2005 .

[21]  Naveen Kumar,et al.  3D Analysis of Breast Augmentation Defines Operative Changes and Their Relationship to Implant Dimensions , 2009, Annals of plastic surgery.

[22]  M. Jenicek.  Clinical case reports and case series research in evaluating surgery. Part I. The context: general aspects of evaluation applied to surgery. , 2008, Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research.

[23]  P. Hedén.  Mastopexy augmentation with form stable breast implants. , 2009, Clinics in plastic surgery.

[24]  David H. Mordaunt,et al.  Four-dimensional breast imaging, part I: introduction of a technology-driven, evidence-based approach to breast augmentation planning. , 2011, Aesthetic surgery journal.

[25]  A. Thoma,et al.  Designing and Reporting Case Series in Plastic Surgery , 2011, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[26]  M. Jenicek.  Clinical case reports and case series research in evaluating surgery. Part II. The content and form: uses of single clinical case reports and case series research in surgical specialties. , 2008, Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research.

[27]  S. Carton,et al.  Apport de l'imagerie tridimensionnelle à la chirurgie d'augmentation mammaire , 2005 .

[28]  W. Adams,et al.  Five Critical Decisions in Breast Augmentation Using Five Measurements in 5 Minutes: The High Five Decision Support Process , 2006, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[29]  J L Grolleau,et al.  ["Morphobreast": patient's data bank management for objective selection of implant's volume in hypotrophic breasts]. , 2005, Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique.

[30]  P. Hedén,et al.  Breast augmentation with anatomical cohesive gel implants: the world's largest current experience. , 2001, Clinics in plastic surgery.

[31]  Mauricio Reyes,et al.  Development and Implementation of a Web-Enabled 3D Consultation Tool for Breast Augmentation Surgery Based on 3D-Image Reconstruction of 2D Pictures , 2012, Journal of medical Internet research.

[32]  MahmoudiSeyyed Ehsan,et al.  Web-based interactive 2D/3D medical image processing and visualization software , 2010 .

[33]  E. Hall-Findlay.  Discussion: A Measurement System for Evaluation of Shape Changes and Proportions after Cosmetic Breast Surgery , 2012, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[34]  Rod J. Rohrich,et al.  Introducing Evidence-Based Medicine to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery , 2009, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[35]  Alexander Bucksch,et al.  Three-Dimensional Laser Imaging as a Valuable Tool for Specifying Changes in Breast Shape After Augmentation Mammaplasty , 2009, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.