Correction of tuberous breast deformity: a retrospective study comparing lipofilling versus breast implant augmentation

• Published in: Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery reconstructive & aesthetic surgery, 2017-05, Vol.70 (5), p.585-595
• Main Authors: Brault, Nicolas, MD, Stivala, Alessio, MD, Guillier, David, MD, Moris, Vivien, MD, Revol, Marc, MD, François, Caroline, MD, Cristofari, Sarra, MD
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adipose Tissue - transplantation; Adolescent; Adult; Breast - abnormalities; Breast augmentation; Breast Implantation - methods; Breast Implants; Breast-Q; Female; Humans; Lipofilling; Mammaplasty - methods; Patient Satisfaction; Plastic Surgery; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Surveys and Questionnaires; Treatment Outcome; Tuberous breast deformity; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1748-6815; 1878-0539
• DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2017.02.011

Summary Breast implants and more recently autologous fat grafting are the two most common treatments used to correct tuberous breast deformity (TBD). Post-surgical quality of life between the two techniques is not well demonstrated. The purpose of this study is to compare satisfaction and health-related quality of life in patients affected of TBD between these two techniques. All TBD patients operated between January 2008 and May 2015 were retrospectively identified and only those treated with implants or lipofilling were included. Satisfaction was evaluated at least six months after surgery with the post-operative Breast-Q® augmentation module. From January 2008 to May 2015, 62 patients were recruited in our study and 37 patients were evaluated with a Breast-Q questionnaire after at least a follow-up of 6 months. Breast implant augmented patients were significantly more satisfied concerning the “satisfaction with breasts” module (p=0.002) and the “satisfaction with outcome” module (p=0.00008). A question-by- question analysis revealed several interesting and significant differences showing higher scores in most of the questions among the breast implant group. Patients in the lipofilling group had an interestingly mean of 1.6 interventions compared to a mean of 1.36 interventions in the implant group (p=0.23). This reflects the need to perform more surgical sessions in the lipofilling group in order to achieve a satisfactory result. Our study demonstrated that tuberous breast correction with implants can achieve better satisfaction joined with good outcomes rather than lipofilling usually does.