• Users Online: 520
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 29  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 4-13

Experience on subfascial mammary augmentation and influence of incisions on technique

Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Gölköy, Bolu, Turkey

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Metin Gorgu
Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Gölköy, Bolu
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/tjps.tjps_93_19

Get Permissions

Introduction: Mammary augmentation is among the most popular types of cosmetic procedures and mammary prosthesis the most commonly accepted technique. A mammary prosthesis can be placed on transaxillary, periareolar, submammary incisions in subglandular, subpectoral, subfascial planes or in a combination of planes. Given the potential interaction between the prosthesis and the surrounding tissues, the plane in which the prosthesis is implanted has an important role among the factors affecting this interaction. The plastic surgeon decides on the incision and plane to be used by assessing the advantages and disadvantages. Materials and Methods: Prostheses were implanted in the subfascial plane in 47 patients who underwent augmentation mammaplasty. Round Moderate Plus or High Profile Cohesive II™ Gel implants were used. Device volumes ranged from 275 to 600 cc. Of the 47 procedures, 23 were performed over an axillary incision, 20 over an inframammary incision, and 4 over a periareolar incision. Endoscopic-assisted dissection was performed in all of the 23 cases in which transaxillary incision was used. Results: All 47 patients who underwent subfascial prosthesis implantation were followed up for a mean of 5 years (range: 2–7 years). Long-term results were satisfactory with few complications. The overall patient satisfaction rate was 89.3%, and none of the patients required an implant removal or change. None of the patients complained of severe pain, regardless of the type of incision, and resumed their daily activities on postoperative day 2. Conclusion: The subfascial augmentation technique provides good and long-term results. It requires longer operating times and is a more difficult technique compared to other planes. As the choice of incision does not largely affect the overall result, the position of the scar depends on the patient's preference, the properties of the implant, and the experience of the surgeon. The endoscopic assistance should be preferred when using the transaxillary approach.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded257    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal