Journal List > J Korean Surg Soc > v.76(2) > 1010987

TOOLS
Lee, Oh, and Choi: Sensory Loss of Upper Inner Arm and Nipple after Transaxillary and Periareolar Augmentation Mammaplasty - MDbP204
Original Article
Journal of the Korean Surgical Society

Journal of the Korean Surgical Society 2009; 76(2): 86-89.

Published online: 28 February 2009

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2009.76.2.86

Sensory Loss of Upper Inner Arm and Nipple after Transaxillary and Periareolar Augmentation Mammaplasty - MDbP204

Sang-Dahl Lee, M.D., Ph.D., Jae-Won Oh, M.D., Jae-Hyuck Choi, M.D.1

M.D. Clinic, Korea.

1Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

dahl65@hanmail.net

Received 3 June 2008       Accepted 4 September 2009

Copyright © 2009 The Korean Surgical Society

Abstract

Purpose

Transaxillary and periareolar incision in augmentation mammaplasty has risks of injury to branches of intercostal nerves that lead to sensory loss of upper inner arm and nipple. The aim of study was to compare the incidence of sensory loss between two groups according to incision method.

Methods

One hundred seventy one cases that received transaxillary or periareolar subpectoral breast augmentation at the M.D. Clinic from Jan. 2006 to Jul. 2007 were evaluated for sensory loss of upper inner arm and nipple. The cases were divided into transaxillary (118 cases, 69%) and periareolar group (53 cases, 31%). The type of sensory loss was divided into temporary and permanent. The postoperative follow-up periods were from 7 to 22 months (mean: 8.5 months).

Results

In cases of upper inner arm, results were as follows; temporary sensory loss in 9 cases (7.6%) and permanent in 2 cases (1.7%) in the transaxillary incision group and, temporary sensory loss in 1 case (1.9%) and no permanent sensory loss in the periareolar incision group. There is no statistical difference between the two groups for permanent sensory loss (P=0.340). In cases of nipples, results were as follows; temporary sensory loss in 26 cases (22%) and permanent sensory loss in 12 cases (10.2%) in the transaxillary incision group, and temporary sensory loss in 12 cases (10.2%) and permanent sensory loss in 3 cases (5.7%) in the periareolar incision group. There was no statistical difference between two groups (P=0.335).

Conclusion

There was no statistical difference in sensory loss of upper arm and nipple between transaxillary and periareolar approach after subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty.

Keywords: Sensory loss, Upper inner arm, Nipple, Augmentation mammaplasty

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1
Transaxillary (A) and periareolar (B) incision.
jkss-76-86-g001
Table 1
Sensory loss of upper inner arm according to approach method
jkss-76-86-i001
Table 2
Sensory loss of nipple according to approach method
jkss-76-86-i002

References

1. Courtiss EH, Goldwyn RM. Breast sensation before and after plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1976. 58:1–13.
2. Farina MA, Newby BG, Alani HM. Innervation of the nipple-areola complex. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1980. 66:497–501.
3. Planas J. Mammary augmentation--surgical techniques, evaluation of results, and complications. Clin Plast Surg. 1976. 3:233–246.
4. Mofid MM, Klatsky SA, Singh NK, Nahabedian MY. Nipple-areola complex sensitivity after primary breast augmentation: a comparison of periareolar and inframammary incision approaches. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006. 117:1694–1698.
5. Okwueze MI, Spear ME, Zwyghuizen AM, Braun SA, Ajmal N, Nanney LB, et al. Effect of augmentation mammaplasty on breast sensation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006. 117:73–83.
6. Lee S. Complications and reasons for dissatisfaction in augmentation mammoplasty: analysis of 42 cases of re-operation. J Korean Breast Cancer Soc. 2004. 7:121–125.
7. Ghaderi B, Hoenig JM, Dado D, Angelats J, Vandevender D. Incidence of intercostobrachial nerve injury after transaxillary breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J. 2002. 22:26–32.
8. Tebbetts JB. Transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: long-term follow-up and refinements. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1984. 74:636–649.
9. Temple WJ, Ketcham AS. Preservation of the intercostobrachial nerve during axillary dissection for breast cancer. Am J Surg. 1985. 150:585–588.
10. Hoehler H. Breast augmentation: the axillary approach. Br J Plast Surg. 1973. 26:373–376.
11. Munhoz AM, Fells K, Arruda E, Montag E, Okada A, Aldrighi C, et al. Subfascial transaxillary breast augmentation without endoscopic assistance: technical aspects and outcome. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2006. 30:503–512.
12. Tebbetts JB. Transaxillary subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty: a 9-year experience. Clin Plast Surg. 1988. 15:557–568.
13. Hetter GP. Satisfactions and dissatisfactions of patients with augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1979. 64:151–155.
14. Hwang K, Jung CY, Lee WJ, Chung IH. The lateral cutaneous branch of the fourth intercostal nerve relating to transaxillary augmentation mammoplasty. Ann Plast Surg. 2004. 53:27–30.
15. Banbury J, Yetman R, Lucas A, Papay F, Graves K, Zins JE. Prospective analysis of the outcome of subpectoral breast augmentation: sensory changes, muscle function, and body image. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004. 113:701–707.
16. Schreiber J, Girotto J, Mofid M, Singh N, Nahabedian M. Comparison study of nipple-areolar sensation after reduction mammaplasty. Aesthet Surg J. 2004. 24:320–323.
TOOLS
Similar articles