|
SUBPECTORAL VS. SUBGLANDULAR The Subfascial Approach in Augmentation under Text and Articles Originally when augmentations were first
performed in the early 1960s with silicone breast implants, they were placed in
the subglandular position over the pectoral muscle. They were hard. They were hard to begin with.
If you look at the old Dow-Corning product descriptions of the implants, there
were no soft implants in the early sixties. They were teardrop shaped, often
with Dacron patches on the back, and they all became hard, and were quite firm
before they were implanted. Since the early type implants were firm to
begin with, they were expected to be firm, and capsule contracture was not felt
to be a major problem. This may be one of the secrets of the Meme
implant, that is that they are firm to begin with, and therefore do not contract
into a ball so easily like the softer implants do. In those early days, firmness
was thought to be desirable to a certain extent anyway. Then in a few years, in the late sixties, the
patients were asking if something couldn't be done about the hardness, and
softer implants were soon on the market. Then in 1967, C.O. Griffiths first
reported the submuscular implant in augmentation. As the capsular contracture problem became
more common with the softer implants, more surgeons shifted to the submuscular
technique, until now (since the 1980s) there are and have been many articles and
opinions in the literature that the implants tend to remain softer in the
submuscular position. The advantages of the subpectoral position are: 1. Dissection is just as easy as pre-pectoral
position. 2. Bleeding is no greater. 3. Hemostasis is as easily obtained. 4. It is substantiated in the literature. 5. It is about as popular as pre-pectoral, if
not more. 6. The muscle over the implant reduces the
feel of hardness if contractures occur. 7. The muscle movement presses on the
implants and may thus keep them a little softer. 8. The muscle over the implants provides a
smoother, straighter contour from clavicle to nipple, without a demarcation line
(especially as seen with capsule contracture) - no “stuck-on” look. 9. The muscle force pushes the implants down,
counteracting the tendency of the capsule contracture to push the implants
superiorly. 10. The implants are further removed from
breast tissue, with less chance of being involved in breast diseases, lactation,
or breast biopsy. 11. There may be less numbness of the nipples
due to less damage to the third, fourth, and fifth intercostal nerves. 12. It is said to be better for mammography
to have implants placed below the muscle. The main disadvantages of submuscular
implants are: 1. Anesthesia, especially local, is more
difficult to achieve. 2. Post-operative pain maybe greater. 3. The muscle may be weakened. 4. The muscle force may push the implant down
too far. 5. There appears to be less cleavage, but
this is debatable. 6. Patients may have a flatter appearance,
with less projection of the breasts forward. 7. The muscles may be visible over the
implants when contracted, and press the implants laterally. This can usually be
prevented. It occurs more frequently with an areolar incision. 8. The breasts may not feel as soft or move
as freely. 9. If capsule contracture occurs, closed
capsulotomy is more difficult. With all these different debatable
considerations, one can see that there is no definite best way for all patients.
Each patient's special circumstances may determine which implant position is
best for her. For example, if the patient is very slender
with very little subcutaneous or breast tissue covering the upper chest, the
patient is a good candidate for submuscular implants. If capsule contracture
occurs and the amount of tissue covering the breasts is exceedingly thin, the
condition will be more noticeable; a sharp demarcation line may occur at the
superior margin of a spherical contracture, causing a stuck on, coffee-cup like
appearance. The submuscular position can partly prevent this from happening. If, however, the patient has considerable
subcutaneous and breast tissue to cover the implant and is particularly desirous
of cleavage, the submammary position might be better. For the patient who is a
professional or serious amateur athlete who uses her arms often, such as with
bowling, golf, tennis, swimming, etc., thorough counseling is needed to choose
the best approach. |
Home | Contact Us | Application for Membership | Bylaws of ASCBS | Surgery Photos | Workshop Registration | Members | Associate Fellows | FellowsProgram2006 | Program2007 | Program 2008 | Program 2009 | Program 2010 | Program 2011 | Program 2012 |Program 2013 l Program 2014 | Program 2015 | Program 2016 | Program 2017 | Program 2018 | Program 2019
The American Society of Cosmetic Breast Surgery 2018 Last modified: September 18, 2021 |