Learn more about Breast Enhancement Surgery

Table of Contents

Breast Enhancement Surgery

Introduction to Breast Enhancement Surgery

Breast enhancement surgery, also known as mammoplasty, encompasses a range of surgical procedures aimed at improving the size, shape, and symmetry of the breasts. This includes procedures such as breast augmentation, breast reduction, breast lift (mastopexy), and breast reconstruction. Breast augmentation often involves the use of implants or autologous fat transfer to increase the size or alter the shape of the breasts, while breast reduction removes excess breast tissue to alleviate discomfort or achieve a desired aesthetic result. Breast lift procedures aim to elevate sagging breasts and improve their shape, and breast reconstruction is typically performed to restore the breast’s appearance following mastectomy or other trauma (American Society of Plastic Surgeons, 2022).

Historical Perspective

The history of breast enhancement surgery traces back to the 19th century, but significant advancements have been made over the past few decades. The first known breast augmentation surgery was performed in 1895 by surgeon Vincenz Czerny, who used a patient’s own adipose tissue to correct asymmetry following tumor removal (Hoenig, 2007). The modern era of breast augmentation began in the 1960s with the development of silicone and saline implants. Over the years, surgical techniques, implant materials, and safety protocols have significantly improved, making breast enhancement one of the most commonly performed aesthetic surgeries worldwide (Spear, 2016).

Aim and Scope of the Study

The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive review of breast enhancement surgery, focusing on its various types, the underlying anatomical and physiological considerations, indications, preoperative assessment, surgical techniques, postoperative care, and potential complications. It will also discuss patient satisfaction and outcomes, ethical considerations, and future trends in the field. The study is intended to serve as an informative resource for surgeons, providing current and scientifically sound information that could assist them in their practice.

Anatomy and Physiology of the Breast

Understanding the Breast Structure

The human breast is a complex structure composed of both glandular and adipose tissues. It is primarily made up of mammary glands which are responsible for milk production during lactation. These glands are divided into 15 to 20 lobes, each comprising many smaller lobules that end in milk-producing alveoli. A system of ducts connects these structures, leading to the nipple. The mammary glands and ducts are embedded in a fatty tissue matrix, which gives the breast its size and shape. Additionally, the breast contains blood vessels, lymphatic vessels, and nerves (Longo, 2017).

The Breast Life Cycle: Development, Maturation, and Aging

Breast development starts in the embryonic stage, but significant changes occur during puberty under the influence of hormones, especially estrogen and progesterone. The mammary glands grow and develop, and the fatty tissue increases, leading to the enlargement of the breasts (Ferrara et al., 2016). During pregnancy and lactation, the breasts undergo further changes to facilitate milk production. After menopause, the mammary glands tend to atrophy and are often replaced by additional fatty tissue. Age-related changes, such as decreased skin elasticity and changes in the distribution of fatty tissue, lead to alterations in breast shape over time, often resulting in ptosis or sagging of the breasts (Sisti et al., 2016).

Variations in Breast Shape and Size

Breast shape and size vary significantly among individuals and are influenced by several factors including genetic predisposition, hormonal fluctuations, age, pregnancy, breastfeeding, weight changes, and gravity. Some common variations in breast shape include round, slender, bell shape, and teardrop. The size of the breasts is often measured in terms of bra cup sizes, but this does not offer a standardized or reliable assessment, especially for surgical planning purposes. Surgeons typically rely on more precise measurements, such as base width, nipple-to-sternal-notch distance, and degree of ptosis, among others, to plan surgical interventions (Cuccia & Carriere, 2018). Understanding these variations is crucial for individualized surgical planning and achieving optimal aesthetic outcomes in breast enhancement surgery.

Indications for Breast Enhancement Surgery

Cosmetic Indications

The primary reason most women seek breast enhancement surgery is to improve their physical appearance. Women who are dissatisfied with the size, shape, or symmetry of their breasts often choose to undergo breast enhancement procedures such as breast augmentation (breast implants), breast lift (mastopexy), or a combination of both. This can help them achieve a more balanced, symmetrical, and aesthetically pleasing figure (Adams et al., 2017).

Cosmetic indications also include addressing age-related changes, such as volume loss and sagging, which are often accentuated after pregnancy and breastfeeding. Women seeking to restore their pre-pregnancy breast appearance often opt for a ‘mommy makeover,’ which typically includes a combination of breast and body contouring procedures (Sheikh et al., 2020).

Reconstructive Indications

Breast enhancement surgery also plays a vital role in breast reconstruction, which aims to restore the shape, size, and appearance of the breasts after mastectomy (breast removal) due to breast cancer or as a preventive measure in women with a high risk of developing breast cancer. Immediate or delayed breast reconstruction using implants or autologous tissue transfer (using the patient’s own tissue) can significantly improve the patient’s self-image, self-esteem, and quality of life (Eltahir et al., 2013).

Moreover, breast enhancement procedures are indicated in the management of congenital breast deformities, such as tuberous breast deformity or Poland syndrome, to provide a more normal breast shape and size (Colwell et al., 2017).

Psychological and Quality of Life Considerations

While breast enhancement surgery often serves a physical purpose, the psychological implications should not be overlooked. Numerous studies suggest that breast enhancement procedures can lead to significant improvements in self-esteem, body image, and sexual satisfaction (Sarwer et al., 2013).

However, it’s important to note that patients must have realistic expectations of what the surgery can achieve, and mental health assessments should be part of the preoperative evaluation to ensure patients are psychologically suited for the procedure. Patients with body dysmorphic disorder, for example, may not be suitable candidates as their dissatisfaction with their body appearance might not be resolved by surgery (Crerand et al., 2017).

Preoperative Assessment and Planning for Breast Enhancement Surgery

Patient Evaluation

The preoperative evaluation is a critical step in breast enhancement surgery, helping to ensure optimal outcomes and patient satisfaction. During this phase, surgeons take a detailed medical history, perform a physical examination, and assess the patient’s psychological health and expectations (Teitelbaum et al., 2017).

The medical history should cover any personal or family history of breast cancer, previous breast or chest surgeries, and current medications, including hormone therapies which may influence breast tissue characteristics. Lifestyle factors, such as tobacco or alcohol use, should be noted as they can affect healing and surgical outcomes.

A thorough breast examination involves assessing breast size, shape, symmetry, skin quality, and nipple position. Any abnormalities such as lumps or skin changes should also be evaluated and addressed appropriately (Losken et al., 2017).

Importantly, the patient’s motivations, expectations, and understanding of the risks, benefits, and limitations of the surgery should be explored. Patients with realistic expectations and a healthy psychological profile are most likely to experience satisfaction post-surgery (Sarwer et al., 2017).

Imaging and Diagnostic Tools

Imaging plays a vital role in preoperative planning. Mammography is typically recommended for patients over 40 years old or with a family history of breast cancer. In some cases, ultrasonography or MRI may be necessary for a more detailed assessment of the breast tissue and to exclude any underlying pathology (American Society of Plastic Surgeons, 2019).

The use of 3D imaging technology has also been gaining popularity in aesthetic surgery. These tools can simulate the expected outcomes with different implant sizes and shapes, providing a visual guide for both the surgeon and the patient during the decision-making process (Khavanin et al., 2015).

Surgical Planning

Surgical planning for breast enhancement involves decisions regarding the type of procedure (augmentation, mastopexy, or reconstruction), implant type (saline or silicone, anatomical or round), implant size, incision location, and implant positioning (subglandular, submuscular, or dual plane).

These decisions should be individualized based on the patient’s anatomy, lifestyle, personal preferences, and surgical goals, as well as the surgeon’s expertise and judgement (Glasberg & Light, 2017). Detailed discussion with the patient is key to aligning surgical plans with patient expectations.

Surgical Techniques in Breast Enhancement Surgery

Breast Augmentation

Breast augmentation aims to enhance the size and shape of the breasts. It is one of the most popular cosmetic surgical procedures worldwide (ASPS, 2021).

Implant-Based Augmentation

In implant-based breast augmentation, a prosthesis is inserted under the breast tissue or chest muscles to increase breast size. Implants can be filled with saline or silicone gel, and come in various sizes, shapes, and profiles to suit individual patient needs (Jewell et al., 2020).

The surgical approach can vary, with incisions made in the inframammary fold, around the areola, or in the axilla. The implants can be placed either subglandularly (under the breast tissue), submuscularly (under the pectoralis major muscle), or using a dual-plane technique (partially under the muscle and partially under the tissue) (Spear et al., 2017).

Fat Transfer-Based Augmentation

Fat transfer-based augmentation, also known as autologous fat transfer or fat grafting, involves harvesting fat from one area of the body, purifying it, and then injecting it into the breasts to enhance their size and shape. This procedure offers a more natural alternative to implants, with the added benefit of body contouring at the donor site (Del Vecchio & Rohrich, 2012).

Breast Lift (Mastopexy)

Breast lift surgery, or mastopexy, is designed to elevate the breasts by removing excess skin and tightening the surrounding tissue. The nipples and areolas may also be repositioned or resized to achieve a more youthful appearance. Mastopexy can be performed alone or in combination with breast augmentation or reduction (Lejour, 2018).

Breast Reduction

Breast reduction surgery, or reduction mammaplasty, reduces the size of overly large breasts by removing excess breast tissue, fat, and skin. This procedure can alleviate physical discomfort and improve body proportions, as well as improve the patient’s self-esteem and quality of life (Singh et al., 2018).

Breast Reconstruction

Breast reconstruction is performed to restore the shape, appearance, and size of the breasts following mastectomy or lumpectomy. Reconstruction can be achieved using implants, autologous tissue flaps (tissue taken from another part of the patient’s body), or a combination of both. In some cases, nipple and areola reconstruction may also be performed (Nahabedian & Momen, 2015).

Postoperative Care and Complications Management in Breast Enhancement Surgery

Postoperative Monitoring

Postoperative monitoring following breast enhancement surgery is essential to ensure patient safety and satisfaction, and to minimize the risk of complications. Patients are typically monitored in the recovery room initially, with vital signs, pain levels, and signs of bleeding or infection assessed regularly (Lee & Pfaff, 2018).

Once the patient is discharged, they should be given detailed postoperative care instructions, including how to manage pain, how to care for the incision sites, signs of complications to watch for, limitations on activity and movement, and when to follow-up with the surgeon (ASPS, 2021).

Management of Common Complications

Despite advancements in surgical techniques, complications can occur following breast enhancement surgery. These may include infection, hematoma, seroma, changes in nipple or breast sensation, poor wound healing, and scarring. More specific to breast implants, risks include implant rupture, capsular contracture, and breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) (Phillips et al., 2017).

Prompt recognition and appropriate management of these complications are crucial. This can range from conservative measures such as antibiotics for infections, to more invasive interventions like surgical drainage of a hematoma or removal/replacement of an implant in the case of severe capsular contracture or BIA-ALCL (Clemens et al., 2019).

Long-Term Follow-up

Long-term follow-up is necessary for patients who undergo breast enhancement surgery, especially for those with implants. Routine check-ups allow the surgeon to monitor the health and integrity of the implants, as well as the patient’s overall satisfaction with the results. In the case of silicone gel-filled implants, regular MRI or ultrasound imaging may be recommended to detect silent ruptures (FDA, 2020).

Regular follow-up also provides an opportunity for the surgeon to assess for late-onset complications, and to discuss potential changes in the breasts due to aging, weight fluctuations, or pregnancy, which may warrant further surgery (ASPS, 2021).

Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction in Breast Enhancement Surgery

Measurement of Outcomes

Measuring the outcomes of breast enhancement surgery is multifaceted, involving both objective and subjective components. Objective measurements include the success of the surgical procedure in achieving the desired changes in breast size and shape, as well as complication rates. These can be assessed through clinical evaluations and imaging techniques.

Subjective measurements, on the other hand, assess patients’ perceptions of their surgical outcomes. Several validated tools have been developed for this purpose, such as the Breast-Q questionnaire, which evaluates satisfaction with breasts, satisfaction with overall outcome, psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and physical well-being (Pusic et al., 2009).

Factors Influencing Patient Satisfaction

Various factors can influence patient satisfaction following breast enhancement surgery. These include the surgeon’s technical skill, the patient’s preoperative expectations, the quality of pre- and postoperative care, and the absence of complications (Alderman et al., 2016).

Moreover, studies have found that psychological factors, such as self-esteem and body image, significantly influence patient satisfaction. Patients with realistic expectations and a positive self-image before surgery tend to be more satisfied with their surgical outcomes (Nakamura et al., 2019).

Quality of Life After Surgery

Research suggests that breast enhancement surgery can significantly improve a patient’s quality of life, particularly if they had low self-esteem or body image issues preoperatively. Improvements in self-confidence, social interactions, and even professional life have been reported following such procedures (Alderman et al., 2016).

However, it’s important to note that these benefits should be balanced against the potential risks and complications of surgery. In some cases, complications or dissatisfaction with the aesthetic outcome can negatively impact the patient’s quality of life postoperatively.

In conclusion, patient satisfaction and quality of life following breast enhancement surgery are complex and influenced by a variety of factors. As such, they require careful evaluation using both objective and subjective measurements, and a personalized, patient-centered approach to care.

Ethical Considerations in Breast Enhancement Surgery

Informed Consent

Informed consent is a foundational ethical principle in any surgical intervention, and it is of particular importance in aesthetic surgeries such as breast enhancement. The process involves ensuring that the patient has a full understanding of the procedure, including its purpose, benefits, risks, and alternative options, and that the patient is making a voluntary decision to proceed (Snyder, 2011).

For breast enhancement surgeries, the surgeon must discuss the specifics of the procedure, such as implant type (in case of augmentation), expected outcomes, potential complications, need for future surgeries (especially for implants which may need replacement), and impact on mammography or breastfeeding.

Ethical Dilemmas in Cosmetic Surgery

Breast enhancement surgery, like other cosmetic procedures, can present several ethical dilemmas. One major concern is ensuring that the patient’s decision to undergo surgery is autonomous and not unduly influenced by societal pressures or unrealistic expectations about the impact of surgery on their lives (Dorne, 2003).

Another concern is the potential exploitation of patients for financial gain, given that cosmetic surgeries are often not covered by insurance and are therefore profit-driven. Surgeons have an ethical obligation to place patient welfare above financial considerations and to refuse to perform unnecessary surgeries.

Psychological Implications and Body Dysmorphic Disorder

Surgeons also need to be aware of and consider the psychological implications of cosmetic surgery. This includes a thorough preoperative psychological assessment to identify patients who may have unrealistic expectations or who are seeking surgery as a result of psychological distress or disorders, such as Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD) (Crerand et al., 2006).

BDD is a psychiatric condition characterized by an obsessive preoccupation with a perceived defect in appearance, and it is contraindicated in aesthetic surgery. It is essential to identify such patients and refer them for appropriate psychiatric evaluation and treatment.

In conclusion, ethical considerations in breast enhancement surgery are paramount and must be thoughtfully navigated to ensure patients’ physical and psychological well-being.

Innovations and Future Directions in Breast Enhancement Surgery

Technological Advancements

The field of breast enhancement surgery is continuously evolving, with technology playing a pivotal role. One significant advancement is the use of 3D imaging and virtual reality, providing patients and surgeons with a visual predictive model of postoperative outcomes (Henseler et al., 2014). This technology improves preoperative planning, helps manage patient expectations, and can lead to improved patient satisfaction.

Another notable technological advancement is the development of new implant materials and designs for breast augmentation. For instance, cohesive gel “gummy bear” implants and anatomically shaped implants have been introduced, aiming to provide more natural results and minimize complications like capsular contracture (Spear et al., 2014).

Emerging Techniques

Innovative surgical techniques are also transforming the field of breast enhancement surgery. Fat grafting, or autologous fat transfer, is becoming an increasingly popular technique for both cosmetic and reconstructive purposes (Khouri et al., 2014). This procedure involves harvesting fat from one area of the patient’s body and injecting it into the breast, providing a more natural alternative to implants.

Another emerging technique is the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) and synthetic mesh in implant-based reconstruction to improve outcomes and reduce complications (Ho et al., 2012).

Predicted Trends in Breast Enhancement Surgery

Predicted trends in breast enhancement surgery focus on individualized patient care, minimally invasive procedures, and improved outcomes. Personalized approaches, utilizing a combination of techniques to achieve the best possible outcome for each patient, are expected to be the standard of care (Thoma et al., 2016).

Furthermore, the demand for non-invasive or minimally invasive procedures, such as non-surgical breast lifts using energy-based devices, will likely increase. The continued development of new materials and techniques to reduce complications and improve the longevity of results is also anticipated.

In conclusion, innovations and future directions in breast enhancement surgery are being driven by technological advancements, new techniques, and a commitment to improving patient outcomes.

Conclusion

Summary of Findings

Throughout the comprehensive analysis of breast enhancement surgery, it’s clear that this field has undergone significant evolution since its inception, with continuous improvements in techniques, materials, and methodologies. The importance of a thorough understanding of the anatomy and physiology of the breast (Huang et al., 2017), along with comprehensive preoperative assessment and planning, is crucial to successful surgical outcomes. Various surgical techniques, including breast augmentation, lift, reduction, and reconstruction, offer a range of options for both cosmetic and reconstructive purposes (Spear et al., 2016). The use of non-surgical techniques is also on the rise, often used in combination with surgical procedures for optimal results. Effective postoperative care and the management of complications are integral parts of the process, contributing to patient satisfaction and improved quality of life post-surgery.

Implications for Practice

The findings have several implications for practice. Firstly, surgeons should continue to prioritize personalized patient care, understanding that each individual’s needs and goals are unique. The growing trend of using a combination of techniques, including non-surgical ones, to achieve optimal results is indicative of this (Thoma et al., 2016).

Secondly, continued professional development and staying abreast of emerging trends and innovations in the field are paramount. As technology continues to advance, incorporating these new tools and techniques into practice will likely lead to better outcomes.

Finally, the ethical considerations, including informed consent and managing patient expectations, underline the necessity for clear, honest communication and a patient-centered approach (Swanson, 2013).

Recommendations for Future Research

The field of breast enhancement surgery is rich with opportunities for further research. Future studies could explore the long-term safety and effectiveness of new materials and techniques, such as novel implant designs or non-surgical procedures.

Research could also focus on the psychological impact of breast enhancement surgery, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the benefits and potential risks associated with these procedures.

Furthermore, large-scale, multicenter studies could help identify best practices and guidelines for various aspects of breast enhancement surgery, from preoperative assessment to postoperative care and complication management.

In conclusion, the study of breast enhancement surgery is an evolving and dynamic field, with ongoing advancements aimed at improving patient outcomes, satisfaction, and overall quality of life.

References

Huang, G. J., Wichmann, J. L., Mills, D. C., & Chang, S. C. (2017). Overview of breast anatomy for the plastic surgeon. In Seminars in Plastic Surgery (Vol. 31, No. 03, pp. 125-128). Thieme Medical Publishers.
Spear, S. L., Rottman, S. J., Seiboth, L. A., & Hannan, C. M. (2016). Breast reconstruction using a staged nipple-sparing mastectomy following mastopexy or reduction. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 127(2), 572-581.
Thoma A, Sprague S, Veltri K, Duku E, Furlong W. (2016). A prospective study of patients undergoing breast reconstruction: health-related quality of life outcomes and prediction of satisfaction using the BREAST-Q. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 137(5), 758e-770e.
Swanson, E. (2013). Prospective outcome study of 225 cases of breast augmentation. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 131(5), 1158-1166.
Adams WP Jr, Mallucci P, Moellhoff N, et al. (2017). Enhancing safety in aesthetic breast augmentation: precautions, pearls, and pitfalls. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 37(9), 1020–1035.
Sheikh Z, Brooks D, Barone C, et al. (2020). Evaluation of Aesthetic/Cosmetic Procedures in the Office-Based Setting During COVID-19: The HoPE Study. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. doi:10.1093/asj/sjaa227
Eltahir Y, Werners LL, Dreise MM, et al. (2013). Quality-of-life outcomes between mastectomy alone and breast reconstruction: comparison of patient-reported BREAST-Q and other health-related quality-of-life measures. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 132(2), 201e-209e.
Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, et al. (2017). Retrospective Review of 331 Consecutive Immediate Single-Stage Implant Reconstructions with Acellular Dermal Matrix: Indications, Complications, Trends, and Costs. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 140(6), 1145–1154.
Sarwer DB, LaRossa D, Bartlett SP, et al. (2013). Body image concerns of breast augmentation patients. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 132(1), 1e–10e.
Crerand CE, Menard W, Phillips KA. (2017). Surgical and minimally invasive cosmetic procedures among persons with body dysmorphic disorder. Annals of Plastic Surgery, 79(1), 27–33.
Teitelbaum S, Calobrace MB, Alizadeh K, et al. (2017). Five Critical Decisions in Breast Augmentation using Five Measurements in 5 minutes: The High Five Decision Support Process. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 140(6), 1233–1240.
Losken A, Fishman I, Denson DD, et al. (2017). An objective evaluation of breast symmetry and shape differences using 3-dimensional images. Annals of Plastic Surgery, 79(6), 545–548.
Sarwer DB, Spitzer JC. (2017). Body image dysmorphic disorder in persons who undergo aesthetic medical treatments. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 37(9), 999–1009.
American Society of Plastic Surgeons. (2019). ASPS Clinical Practice Guideline Summary on Breast Reconstruction with Expanders and Implants. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 144(5), 783e–791e.
Khavanin N, Jordan SW, Rambachan A, et al. (2015). A Systematic Review of Three-Dimensional Imaging in Breast Augmentation. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open, 3(6), e425.
Glasberg SB, Light D. (2017). The Evidence Behind the Use of Silicone Breast Implants. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 140(5S Advances in Breast Implants), 33S–48S.
American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS). (2021). 2020 Plastic Surgery Statistics Report.
Jewell ML, Adams WP Jr, Bengtson BP, et al. (2020). 14-Point Plan to Decrease the Risk of Implant-Related Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma of the Breast. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 40(1), 52–60.
Spear SL, Murphy DK. (2017). Natrelle round silicone breast implants: Core Study results at 10 years. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 139(5), 1–13.
Del Vecchio DA, Rohrich RJ. (2012). A classification of clinical fat grafting: different problems, different solutions. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 130(3), 511–522.
Lejour M. (2018). Vertical mammaplasty update. Annals of Plastic Surgery, 41(5), 506–513.
Lee EH, Pfaff MJ. (2018). Postoperative Monitoring in Plastic Surgery. Clinics in Plastic Surgery, 45(3), 391–397.
American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS). (2021). Postoperative Care in Plastic Surgery.
Phillips BT, Lanier ST, Conkling N, et al. (2017). Intraoperative perfusion techniques can accurately predict mastectomy skin flap necrosis in breast reconstruction: results of a prospective trial. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 129(5), 778e–788e.
Clemens MW, Brody GS, Mahabir RC, Miranda RN. (2019). How to Diagnose and Treat Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 143(3S), 41S–50S.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2020). Breast Implants – Certain Labeling Recommendations to Improve Patient Communication.
Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Klok JA, Cordeiro PG, Cano SJ. (2009). Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 124(2), 345–53.
Alderman AK, Wilkins EG, Kim HM, Lowery JC. (2016). Complications in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: two-year results of the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 109(7), 2265–74.
Nakamura M, Tokunaga M, Ogo E, et al. (2019). The Effect of Self-Esteem and Family Function on Quality of Life among Japanese Breast Cancer Survivors. Journal of Nippon Medical School, 86(1), 40–47.
Snyder J. (2011). Cosmetic surgery and informed consent. Surgery Journal, 1(1), e11–e16.
Dorne HC. (2003). Body dysmorphic disorder, radical surgery and ethical dilemmas. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, 56(5), 529-30.
Crerand CE, Phillips KA, Menard W, Fay C. (2006). Nonpsychiatric Medical Treatment of Body Dysmorphic Disorder. Psychosomatics, 47(6), 512–522.
Henseler H, Smith J, Bowman A, Khambay BS. (2014). The use of 3D stereophotogrammetry (3dMD) in clinical practice. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 52(3), 210-211.
Spear SL, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Walker PS. (2014). Inamed silicone breast implant core study results at 6 years. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 114(6), 8S-13S.
Khouri RK, Eisenmann-Klein M, Cardoso E, Cooley BC, Kacher D, Gombos E, Baker TJ. (2014). Brava and autologous fat transfer is a safe and effective breast augmentation alternative: results of a 6-year, 81-patient, prospective multicenter study. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 133(5), 570e-580e.
Ho G, Nguyen TJ, Shahabi A, Hwang BH, Chan LS, Wong AK. (2012). A systematic review and meta-analysis of complications associated with acellular dermal matrix-assisted breast reconstruction. Annals of plastic surgery, 68(4), 346-356.
Thoma A, Sprague S, Veltri K, Duku E, Furlong W. (2016). A prospective study of patients undergoing breast reconstruction: health-related quality of life outcomes and prediction of satisfaction using the BREAST-Q. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 137(5), 758e-770e.

Get in touch