Download PDF
CC BY-NC 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2014; 41(05): 458-465
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2014.41.5.458
Review Article

Transaxillary Endoscopic Breast Augmentation

Hyung-Bo Sim
BR Baram Clinic, Seoul, Korea
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

The axillary technique is the most popular approach to breast augmentation among Korean women. Transaxillary breast augmentation is now conducted with sharp electrocautery dissection under direct endoscopic vision throughout the entire process. The aims of this method are clear: both a bloodless pocket and a sharp non-traumatic dissection. Round textured or anatomical cohesive gel implants have been used to make predictable well-defined inframammary creases because textured surface implants demonstrated a better stability attributable to tissue adherence compared with smooth surface implants. The axillary endoscopic technique has greatly evolved, and now the surgical results are comparable to those with the inframammary approach. The author feels that this technique is an excellent choice for young patients with an indistinct or absent inframammary fold, who do not want a scar in the aesthetic unit of their chest.

Keywords

Axilla - Endoscopes - Mammaplasty - Breast implants


Publication History

Received: 02 July 2013

Accepted: 31 July 2013

Article published online:
05 May 2022

© 2014. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Tebbetts JB. Transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: long-term follow-up and refinements. Plast Reconstr Surg 1984; 74: 636-649
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ho LC. Endoscopic assisted transaxillary augmentation mammaplasty. Br J Plast Surg 1993; 46: 332-336
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Price CI, Eaves 3rd FF, Nahai F. et al. Endoscopic transaxillary subpectoral breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994; 94: 612-619
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Tebbetts JB. Dual plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant-soft-tissue relationships in a wide range of breast types. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 107: 1255-1272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Sim HB, Hwang K, Huan F. et al. Anatomy and tensile strength of the abdominal head of the pectoralis major muscle in relation to transaxillary breast augmentation. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2013; 37: 359-363
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Troilius C. Total muscle coverage of a breast implant is possible through the transaxillary approach. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995; 95: 509-512
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Howard PS. The role of endoscopy and implant texture in transaxillary submuscular breast augmentation. Ann Plast Surg 1999; 42: 245-248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Fryzek JP, Signorello LB, Hakelius L. et al. Local complications and subsequent symptom reporting among women with cosmetic breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 107: 214-221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Handel N, Cordray T, Gutierrez J. et al. A long-term study of outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction with breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 117: 757-767
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Tebbetts JB. Axillary endoscopic breast augmentation: processes derived from a 28-year experience to optimize outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 118: 53S-80S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Momeni A, Padron NT, Bannasch H. et al. Endoscopic transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: a safe and predictable procedure. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59: 1076-1081
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Burden WR, Kelley PM. Endoscopic breast subpectoral augmentation for second-degree breast ptosis. Ann Plast Surg 2001; 46: 238-241
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lindsey JT. The case against medial pectoral releases: a retrospective review of 315 primary breast augmentation patients. Ann Plast Surg 2004; 52: 253-256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Tebbetts JB. Achieving a predictable 24-hour return to normal activities after breast augmentation: part II. patient preparation, refined surgical techniques, and instrumentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 109: 293-305
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Munhoz AM, Aldrighi C, Buschpiegel C. et al. The feasibility of sentinel lymph node detection in patients with previous transaxillary implant breast augmentation: preliminary results. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2005; 29: 163-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Barnsley GP, Sigurdson LJ, Barnsley SE. Textured surface breast implants in the prevention of capsular contracture among breast augmentation patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 117: 2182-2190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Jacobson JM, Gatti ME, Schaffner AD. et al. Effect of incision choice on outcomes in primary breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 2012; 32: 456-462
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Stutman RL, Codner M, Mahoney A. et al. Comparison of breast augmentation incisions and common complications. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2012; 36: 1096-1104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar