FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4226022005> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4226022005 endingPage "e4068" @default.
• W4226022005 startingPage "e4068" @default.
• W4226022005 abstract "Sir: A 17-author article from Italy promotes the periareolar approach as an “all seasons” technique for multiple breast conditions.1 This recommendation will surprise many plastic surgeons. Usually, the periareolar approach is recommended for mild breast ptosis.2 For moderate and severe cases, the vertical and Wise pattern methods are preferred.2 Benelli3 popularized the periareolar method in 1990. However, it soon fell out of favor. A 2006 surgeon survey found that only 6% of respondents used this approach exclusively.4 This method had the lowest rate of surgeon satisfaction, and its representation among medical malpractice cases was disproportionately high in a 2004 review (62% of mastopexy claims).5 Measurements reveal that the periareolar technique produces no significant benefit in breast projection, upper pole projection, lower pole elevation, breast convexity, or breast parenchymal ratio.6 It is often a skin-only resection.4,7 Parenchymal resection is needed for a lasting improvement in shape.6 Not only is the wrong tissue being removed, but it is also being removed from the wrong place—around the areola rather than from the lower pole.6 The skin resection is placed exactly where the skin envelope is expanded by an implant, maximizing tension on the areola.8 An oval skin resection produces a noncircular areolar border (Fig. 1).8Fig. 1.: This 59-year-old woman is shown before (A) and after (B) a periareolar breast reduction. The photographs have been matched for size and orientation using the Canfield 7.4.1 Mirror Imaging software (Canfield Scientific, Fairfield, N.J.). A 32.5 cm upper arm length was used for calibration. The lower pole elevation measures 2.37 cm on the right side and 0.95 cm on the left. There is noticeable pleating and lack of circularity of the areolar margins. The postoperative time is not provided. Adapted from Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2021;9:e3693.1The authors use a round-block (purse-string) technique3 to minimize areolar deformity. However, permanent sutures have not proven successful in preventing areolar deformity and can be a nuisance for patients and surgeons after surgery.4,8 The authors do not report when they remove their bulky 2-0 polypropylene sutures. The tension can produce the unsightly “tomato breast” appearance.8 A persistent “starburst” appearance of the areola (Fig. 1) looks unnatural.8 Instead of patient-reported outcomes in consecutive surveyed patients, Klinger et al1 report visual analog scores and complications in a minority (1400/5028, 28%) of randomly selected procedures. The authors do not describe their randomization method. Typically, an inclusion rate of at least 80% is needed to qualify as evidence-based medicine and avoid selection bias.9 Most of the procedures (58%) were breast-conserving lumpectomies,1 which are not normally included in mastopexy studies because the indications and objectives are different. Spear et al10 reported the results of their outcome study of augmentation/mastopexies, including 74% of patients treated with periareolar mastopexies. The authors were surprised by the “unimpressive” scores assigned to photographs evaluated by blinded reviewers with only 4 of 30 results rated as excellent. Over one-half of the surveyed women requested a revision. The rate of ptosis “relapse” (ie, inadequate correction) after mastopexy is also comparatively high (9.1%) among the 28% subset of patients selected for reporting of complications by Klinger et al.1 Usually, articles reporting periareolar mastopexy include women treated with breast implants.1,6 Breast implants make any mastopexy technique look better. Only one set of photographs demonstrate a mastopexy in a woman treated without implants or fat injection. The photographs are not standardized. No measurement data are provided. The most favorable comparison depicts a 45-year-old woman before and after augmentation combined with periareolar mastopexy. Her before image shows a ptotic, deflated breast. The after photograph was reportedly taken 4 months after surgery. However, small suture holes along the areola margin have not healed. There is still visible pleating around the areola. No frontal images accompany these lateral photographs. The authors use the label “stenotic” breasts, but the left breast does not appear constricted; the skin envelope is loose and widely-based. Does an improved lift and avoidance of an areolar scar deformity justify an additional vertical, and possible (short) horizontal, inframammary scar? Only measurements6,11 and patient-reported outcomes10,12,13 can provide an answer. Comparisons favor the vertical mastopexy (Table 1).6 Table 1. - Comparison of Mammaplasty Methods Parameter Periareolar Vertical Lower pole elevation6,11 + +++ Increase in breast projection6,11 0 + Increase in upper pole projection6,11 0 + Increase in breast convexity6,11 0 + Increase in breast parenchymal ratio6,11 + +++ Nipple elevation6,11 + +++ Nipple circularity6,8 + +++ Learning curve1,4,6 Long Short Sutures1,8 Permanent Dissolving Patient satisfaction10,12,13 + +++ Surgeon satisfaction4 + +++ Medicolegal risk4,5 +++ + Vertical scar None Yes Lower pole tightening6,8 0 +++ Areola tension4,6,8 +++ 0 Areola scar quality1,4,6,8 + +++ Periareolar pleats8 +++ 0 Suitability for moderate or severe ptosis1,2,6,8,13 0 +++ Tellingly, the authors rarely use this operation for breast reduction.1 The one example they offer does not indicate the follow-up time and demonstrates excessive pleating that is unlikely to resolve (Fig. 1). Lower pole elevation is minimal. The breasts appear deflated and wide, owing to the absence of a midline resection to tighten the lower pole and provide conicity. (This problem is shared by the “no vertical scar” mammaplasty.)6 If the objective is to lift the breast, the geometry of the approach must fit with this objective. The vertical augmentation/mastopexy has the geometric foundation6 and both measurement data11 and outcome data13 to support it as a superior “all seasons augmentation/mastopexy.”13 DISCLOSURE Dr Swanson receives royalties from Springer Nature (Cham, Switz.)." @default.
• W4226022005 created "2022-05-05" @default.
• W4226022005 creator A5052717905 @default.
• W4226022005 date "2022-01-01" @default.
• W4226022005 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W4226022005 title "The Limitations of Periareolar Mammaplasty" @default.
• W4226022005 cites W1965185283 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W1986508134 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W1987824774 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W2038208035 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W2038831076 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W2039448331 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W2041601727 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W2055587122 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W2565007970 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W2978563088 @default.
• W4226022005 cites W3185057443 @default.
• W4226022005 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/gox.0000000000004068" @default.
• W4226022005 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35083108" @default.
• W4226022005 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4226022005 type Work @default.
• W4226022005 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W4226022005 countsByYear W42260220052022 @default.
• W4226022005 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4226022005 hasAuthorship W4226022005A5052717905 @default.
• W4226022005 hasBestOaLocation W42260220051 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C111335779 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C137762411 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C165383583 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2776964564 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2777704003 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2778187792 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2778579461 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2779238821 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2781037480 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2781194658 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C2781411149 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C530470458 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C111335779 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C121608353 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C126322002 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C137762411 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C141071460 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C165383583 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2524010 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2776964564 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2777704003 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2778187792 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2778579461 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2779238821 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2781037480 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2781194658 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C2781411149 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C33923547 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C530470458 @default.
• W4226022005 hasConceptScore W4226022005C71924100 @default.
• W4226022005 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W4226022005 hasLocation W42260220051 @default.
• W4226022005 hasLocation W42260220052 @default.
• W4226022005 hasLocation W42260220053 @default.
• W4226022005 hasLocation W42260220054 @default.
• W4226022005 hasLocation W42260220055 @default.
• W4226022005 hasOpenAccess W4226022005 @default.
• W4226022005 hasPrimaryLocation W42260220051 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W2003593788 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W2052398168 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W2068493548 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W2078364447 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W2120208401 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W2858314523 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W2911893146 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W4226022005 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W4254109966 @default.
• W4226022005 hasRelatedWork W3160925631 @default.
• W4226022005 hasVolume "10" @default.
• W4226022005 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4226022005 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4226022005 workType "article" @default.