Central Pedicle Breast Reduction

No Results

No Results

processing….

Balch first described the central pedicle reduction technique in 1981, although it was also described by many, including Hester et al. ^{[1, 2, 3]} The principle of this technique is to preserve the breast volume where maximum projection is desired, in the central portion of the breast. Evolution of the technique has resulted in the current technique described here. ^{[4, 5]}

Macromastia, or mammary hyperplasia, is the condition of large breast size out of proportion to a woman’s body habitus that is associated with symptoms including back, neck, and shoulder pain. Macromastia is a common condition treated by plastic surgeons.

Reduction mammaplasty is one of the 5 most frequently performed reconstructive operations. According to the American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASPS), more than 153,087 breast reduction procedures were performed in 2007 up from 47,874 in 1997. ^[6] The ASPS/Plastic Surgery Educational Foundation (PSEF) procedural data from 2007 lists 105,706 cases of reduction mammaplasty, up from 39,639 cases in 1992. ^[7]

Etiology is unknown.

The precise pathophysiology of macromastia is unclear. ^[8] End-organ hypersensitivity to hormonal stimulation appears to play a role. With the onset of menarche and hormonal production, breast growth and, in some cases, hypertrophy can be seen. Some patients present with macromastia following pregnancy; others see exacerbation of macromastia related to weight gain or obesity. ^{[9, 10]}

Preoperative assessment includes a standard history and physical examination, with special attention directed to breast history and health, including family history of breast cancer. Preoperative photos should be taken and reviewed with the patient to point out conditions such as preexisting asymmetry. Representative before and after photos also should be reviewed if available to ensure that the patient understands the scars and has realistic expectations.

Macromastia is a common condition treated by plastic surgeons. Because women have various body shapes and sizes, and rules regarding insurance coverage vary from region to region, no universally accepted definition of macromastia that requires surgery exists. However, definite symptoms exist, which have been documented by numerous authors including Hagerty, Shewmake, and Gonzalez among many others. ^{[11, 12, 13]} Most commonly, these symptoms consist of upper back and neck pain, breast pain, shoulder grooving from bra straps, and inframammary intertrigo.

In an effort to relieve these symptoms of pain, a number of surgical techniques for reduction mammaplasty have been described using various pedicles and skin resections. ^{[14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21]} The ideal breast reduction results in complete relief of symptoms while maintaining normal sensation and the ability to lactate. Additionally, the operation should result in an aesthetically pleasing breast shape with minimal scarring and a low complication rate. Lastly, most or all of these objectives should be achieved in a time-efficient and cost-efficient manner.

Successful breast reduction involves remodeling the breast parenchyma and creating a pedicle to maintain blood supply to the nipple-areola complex (NAC). Although vascular compromise is generally venous in breast reduction surgery, clear anatomical descriptions of the breast veins are lacking in textbooks.

A study by Karacor-Altuntas indicated that central pedicle horizontal scar breast reduction can be safely and effectively used in cases of gigantomastia without free nipple graft. The study included 53 patients (106 breasts) in whom the distance from the midclavicular point to the nipple ranged from 38-52 cm, with no patients experiencing postoperative nipple loss. ^[22]

Breast shape varies among patients, but knowing and understanding the anatomy of the breast (see the image below) ensures safe surgical planning. When the breasts are carefully examined, significant asymmetries are revealed in most patients. Any preexisting asymmetries, spinal curvature, or chest wall deformities must be recognized and demonstrated to the patient, as these may be difficult to correct and can become noticeable in the postoperative period. Preoperative photographs with multiple views are obtained on all patients and maintained as part of the office record.

The female breast consists of the glandular breast mound and the axillary tail of Spence. The nipple-areola complex (NAC) is the most prominent anatomic feature on the breast. It has important relations to the underlying glandular tissue.

The first of these relations consists of the blood supply to the NAC, which enters through the glandular breast tissue but also receives contributions from the subdermal plexus of the breast skin.

The second important anatomic relationship between the glandular breast tissue and the NAC is that of innervation. The nipple lies in the dermatome of the fourth intercostal nerve. Additional innervation is contributed by adjacent dermatomes. No clear anatomic distinction has been identified for innervation contributing erogenous versus tactile sensation.

Lastly, one must consider the communication between the lactiferous ducts of the glandular breast tissue and the nipple. Clearly, the importance of this depends upon the patient’s childbearing status and any prior demonstration of the ability (or inability) to lactate.

For more information about the relevant anatomy, see Breast Anatomy.

Contraindications to breast reduction surgery are similar to contraindications to any elective surgical procedure, including cardiac and pulmonary considerations. Fortunately, most women seeking breast reduction surgery are often young and in otherwise good health. Since the operation is performed to relieve symptoms and not to treat a life- or limb-threatening disease, use common sense regarding general anesthetic risks. Smoking, diabetes, and obesity have been associated with increased complication rates, including nipple necrosis.

See MH. Central pedicle reduction mammoplasty: a reliable technique. Gland Surg. 2014 Feb. 3 (1):51-4. [Medline]. [Full Text].

Balch CR. The central mound technique for reduction mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1981 Mar. 67(3):305-11. [Medline].

Hester TR Jr, Bostwick J 3rd, Miller L, Cunningham SJ. Breast reduction utilizing the maximally vascularized central breast pedicle. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985 Dec. 76(6):890-900. [Medline].

Grant JH 3rd, Rand RP. The maximally vascularized central pedicle breast reduction: evolution of a technique. Ann Plast Surg. 2001 Jun. 46(6):584-9. [Medline].

Cho BC, Yang JD, Baik BS. Periareolar reduction mammoplasty using an inferior dermal pedicle or a central pedicle. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2008. 61(3):275-81. [Medline].

Surgical and Nonsurgical Procedures: 11-year Comparison, 1997-2007. 6/23/08;

2007 Reconstructive Plastic Surgery Trends 1992, 2006, 2007. 6/23/08;

de la Torre JI, Vasconez LO. Macromastia and Reduction Mammaplasty. Bland KI, Copeland EM. The Breast. 3rd ed. St. Louis, Mo: Saunders; 2004. Vol 2: 43. [Full Text].

Ayan F, Sakoglu N, Paksoy M, As A, Dogan M. Pregnancy-induced macromastia. Breast J. 2004 Sep-Oct. 10(5):448. [Medline].

Cruz-Korchin N, Korchin L, González-Keelan C, Climent C, Morales I. Macromastia: how much of it is fat?. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002 Jan. 109(1):64-8. [Medline].

Hagerty RC, Hagerty RF. Reduction mammaplasty: central cone technique for maximal preservation of vascular and nerve supply. South Med J. 1989 Feb. 82(2):183-5. [Medline].

Shewmake KB. Reduction mammaplasty and mastopexy. Selected Readings in Plast Surg. 1994. 7:30:1-27.

Gonzalez F, Walton RL, Shafer B, et al. Reduction mammaplasty improves symptoms of macromastia. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993 Jun. 91(7):1270-6. [Medline].

Courtiss EH, Goldwym RM. Reduction mammaplasty by the inferior pedicle technique. An alternative to free nipple and areola grafting for severe macromastia or extreme ptosis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1977 Apr. 59(4):500-7. [Medline].

McKissock PK. Reduction mammaplasty by the vertical bipedicle flap technique. Rationale and results. Clin Plast Surg. 1976 Apr. 3(2):309-20. [Medline].

McKissock PK. Invited discussion: Breast reduction utilizing the maximally vascularized central breast pedicle. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985. 76:899-900.

Parenteau JM, Regnault P. The Regnault “B” technique in mastopexy and breast reduction: a 12-year review. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1989 Spring. 13(2):75-9. [Medline].

Yousif NJ, Larson DL, Sanger JR, Matloub HS. Elimination of the vertical scar in reduction mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992 Mar. 89(3):459-67; discussion 468. [Medline].

Reus WF, Mathes SJ. Preservation of projection after reduction mammaplasty: long-term follow-up of the inferior pedicle technique. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1988 Oct. 82(4):644-52. [Medline].

Moufarrege R, Beauregard G, Bosse JP, et al. Reduction mammoplasty by the total dermoglandular pedicle. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1985. 9(3):227-32. [Medline].

Wise RJ. A preliminary report on a method of planning the mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1956 May. 17(5):367-75. [Medline].

Karacor-Altuntas Z, Dadaci M, Ince B, Karamese M, Savaci N. Central Pedicle Reduction in Gigantomastia Without Free Nipple Graft. Ann Plast Surg. 2016 Apr. 76 (4):383-7. [Medline].

Bayramiçli M. The central pillar technique: a new septum-based pedicle design for reduction mammaplasty. Aesthet Surg J. 2012 Jul. 32(5):578-90. [Medline].

Brown DM, Young VL. Reduction mammoplasty for macromastia. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1993. 17(3):211-23. [Medline].

Nahabedian MY, McGibbon BM, Manson PN. Medial pedicle reduction mammaplasty for severe mammary hypertrophy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000 Mar. 105(3):896-904. [Medline].

Chang P, Shaaban AF, Canady JW, Ricciardelli EJ, Cram AE. Reduction mammaplasty: the results of avoiding nipple-areolar amputation in cases of extreme hypertrophy. Ann Plast Surg. 1996 Dec. 37(6):585-91. [Medline].

Schlenz I, Rigel S, Schemper M, Kuzbari R. Alteration of nipple and areola sensitivity by reduction mammaplasty: a prospective comparison of five techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005 Mar. 115(3):743-51; discussion 752-4. [Medline].

Hamdi M, Blondeel P, Van de Sijpe K, et al. Evaluation of nipple-areola complex sensitivity after the latero-central glandular pedicle technique in breast reduction. Br J Plast Surg. 2003 Jun. 56(4):360-4. [Medline].

Cruz NI, Korchin L. Lactational performance after breast reduction with different pedicles. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007 Jul. 120(1):35-40. [Medline].

Gamboa-Bobadilla GM, Killingsworth C. Large-volume reduction mammaplasty: the effect of body mass index on postoperative complications. Ann Plast Surg. 2007 Mar. 58(3):246-9. [Medline].

Setälä L, Papp A, Joukainen S, Martikainen R, Berg L, Mustonen P, et al. Obesity and complications in breast reduction surgery: are restrictions justified?. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. Nov 24 2007. [Medline]. [Full Text].

Chan LK, Withey S, Butler PE. Smoking and wound healing problems in reduction mammaplasty: is the introduction of urine nicotine testing justified?. Ann Plast Surg. 2006 Feb. 56(2):111-5. [Medline].

Spector JA, Singh SP, Karp NS. Outcomes after breast reduction: does size really matter?. Ann Plast Surg. 2008 May. 60(5):505-9. [Medline].

Iwuagwu OC. Effects of reduction mammaplasty on pulmonary function and symptoms of macromastia. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 Dec. 112(7):1969-70; author reply 1970. [Medline].

O’Blenes CA, Delbridge CL, Miller BJ, Pantelis A, Morris SF. Prospective study of outcomes after reduction mammaplasty: long-term follow-up. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006 Feb. 117(2):351-8. [Medline].

Kerrigan CL, Slezak SS. Evidence-based medicine: reduction mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Dec. 132(6):1670-83. [Medline].

American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer: Breast cancer. Available at http://www.cancer.org/Healthy/FindCancerEarly/CancerScreeningGuidelines/american-cancer-society-guidelines-for-the-early-detection-of-cancer. Accessed: April 11, 2016.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Annual mammograms now recommended for women beginning at age 40. Available at http://www.acog.org/About_ACOG/News_Room/News_Releases/2011/Annual_Mammograms_Now_Recommended_for_Women_Beginning_at_Age_40. Accessed: April 11, 2016.

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Nov 17. 151(10):716-26, W-236. [Medline].

Kim YS, Hwang K, Kim JH, Kim TH, Kim HM. Central pedicle reduction mammaplasty with a vertical scar: a technical modification. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2017 Dec. 51 (6):436-45. [Medline].

Balch CR. The central mound technique for reduction mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1981 Mar. 67(3):305-11. [Medline].

Georgiade NG, Serafin D, Morris R, Georgiade G. Reduction mammaplasty utilizing an inferior pedicle nipple-areolar flap. Ann Plast Surg. 1979 Sep. 3(3):211-8. [Medline].

Ribeiro L, Accorsi A Jr, Buss A, Marcal-Pessoa M. Creation and evolution of 30 years of the inferior pedicle in reduction mammaplasties. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002 Sep 1. 110(3):960-70. [Medline].

Jorge I de la Torre, MD, FACS Professor of Surgery and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Chief, Division of Plastic Surgery, Residency Program Director, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine; Director, Center for Advanced Surgical Aesthetics

Jorge I de la Torre, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Burn Association, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery, American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery, Association for Academic Surgery, Medical Association of the State of Alabama

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

James Neal Long, MD, FACS Founder of Magnolia Plastic Surgery; Former Associate Professor of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, Children’s Hospital and Kirklin Clinics, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine; Section Chief of Plastic, Reconstructive, Hand, and Microsurgery, Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center

James Neal Long, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Plastic Surgery Research Council, Sigma Xi, Southeastern Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons, Southeastern Surgical Congress

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

James Neal Long, MD, FACS Founder of Magnolia Plastic Surgery; Former Associate Professor of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, Children’s Hospital and Kirklin Clinics, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine; Section Chief of Plastic, Reconstructive, Hand, and Microsurgery, Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center

James Neal Long, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Plastic Surgery Research Council, Sigma Xi, Southeastern Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons, Southeastern Surgical Congress

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Pankaj Tiwari, MD Assistant Professor, Division of Plastic Surgery, Ohio State University College of Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

The authors and editors of Medscape Reference gratefully acknowledge the contributions of previous author John H. Grant III, MD, to the development and writing of this article.

Central Pedicle Breast Reduction

Research & References of Central Pedicle Breast Reduction|A&C Accounting And Tax Services
Source

Share on Facebook

Tweet

Follow us