Keywords
Breast implants
Surgical flaps
Plastic surgery
How to Cite
Copyright © | All rights reserved.
The journal holds the exclusive copyright for the publication of this article under the terms of Brazilian law 9610/98.
Partial reproduction
The use of parts of the texts, figures and questionnaire of the article is free, being mandatory the citation of the authors and journal.
Total reproduction
It is expressly prohibited and must be authorized by the journal.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate complications, clinical outcomes, and satisfaction of patients undergoing augmentation mastopexy with implant support using a muscular flap from the lower portion of the pectoralis major. Methods: Prospective longitudinal cohort study with patients operated between March 2022 and October 2024, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Postoperative complications and satisfaction, measured by a 5-point Likert scale (1 = poor; 5 = excellent), were analyzed. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee (CAAE: 81283224.8.0000.0018). Results: 43 patients were evaluated, with a mean follow-up of 19.2±5.4 months. Twenty-one patients (48.8%) had previous breast surgery with implants, with the surgical indication motivated by aesthetic complaints. The most frequent complications were upper pole height asymmetry (3/43 patients; 7.0%), inferior displacement of the parenchyma over the implant (waterfall deformity) (2/43 patients; 4.7%), and partial wound dehiscence (8/86 breasts; 9.3%). Postoperative satisfaction was rated as “very good” or “excellent” (Likert 4–5) in 86.0% of patients. Conclusion: The technique represents a promising alternative when seeking greater upper pole projection and stability of the aesthetic result. It is recommended to discuss the risks of cleavage asymmetry and waterfall deformity.
References
ARAÚJO LRR, ITIKAWA WM. Modified double space technique for augmentation mastopexy. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2022; 37(1): 36-44.
ARTZ JD, et al. Mastopexia com retalho de pedículo superior e implante de silicone. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019; 7(6): pe2272.
BECKER H, FREGOSI N. The Impact of Animation Deformity on Quality of Life in Post-Mastectomy Reconstruction Patients. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2017; 37(5): 531-536.
DAHER JC, et al. Mastopexia associada a implante de silicone submuscular ou subglandular: sistematização das escolhas e dificuldades. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2012; 27: 294-300.
GOMES RS. Mastopexia com retalho de pedículo superior e implante de silicone. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2008; 23(4): 241-247.
DANIEL MJB. Inclusion of the breast prosthesis in double space. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2005;20:82-87.
GRAF RM. Does fascia provide additional, meaningful coverage over a breast implant? Reply. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004; 113(2): 779-80.
GRAF RM, et al. Intramuscular Breast Augmentation in Secondary Mastopexy Augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2025; 155(1): 44e-52e.
HUBAIDE M, et al. Safe Augmentation Mastopexy: Review of 500 Consecutive Cases Using a Vertical Approach and Muscular Sling. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2024; 12(1): e5504.
HUBAIDE M, et al. Composite Sling: A Strategy for Enhancing Inferolateral Support in Mastopexy whith Implant. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2024; 12: e6053.
International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ISAPS) 2024. ISAPS global survey. Disponível em: https://www.isaps.org/media/oogpzodr/isaps-global-survey_2024.pdf. Acessado em 30 de março de 2026.
ISMAIL KT, et al. Triple-Plane Augmentation Mastopexy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019; 7: e2344.
KHAVANIN N, et al. A systematic review of single-stage augmentation-mastopexy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014; 134(5): 922-931.
MUNHOZ AM, et al. Single-stage augmentation mastopexy with composite reverse inferior muscle sling technique for autologous reinforcement of the inferior pole: technical refinements and outcomes. Aesthet Surg J. 2020; 40(6): 356-373.
MUNHOZ AM, et al. Hybrid Augmentation Mastopexy with New Generation of Smooth Surface Implants: Combining the Benefits of Fat Grafting, Inferior Muscle Support, and an L-Shaped Scar. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023; 152: 29e-41e.
NETO LG. Tratamento da ptose mamária através da colocação de implantes de silicone subfascial seguidos de mastopexia em “T” invertido. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2020; 35: 269-275.
ONO MT, KARNER BM. Four-step augmentation mastopexy: Lift and augmentation at single time. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019; 7(11): pe2523.
PESSOA MCM, et al. Mastopexia com implantes: uso sistemático dos retalhos de base inferior de Ribeiro. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2013; 28(3): 333-342.
PROCÓPIO LD, et al. Implante submuscular em duplo bolso para mastopexias de aumento. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2019; 34(2): 187-195.
REGNAULT P. Breast Ptosis: Definition and Treatment. Clin Plast Surg. 1976; 3(2): 193-203.
RIGO MH, et al. SMS-Split muscle support: A reproducible approach for breast implant stabilization. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2020; 44(3): 698-705.
SGARBI JM, et al. Mastopexia com splitting de músculo peitoral superior e cinta muscular inferior. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2021; 36: 115-121.
SOARES AB, et al. Mastopexy with breast implants and the pectoralis major muscle flap: a technique adopted by the Department of Plastic Surgery of Unicamp. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2011; 26(4): 659-63.
SPEAR SL, et al. One-stage augmentation combined with mastopexy: aesthetic results and patient satisfaction. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2004; 28(5): 259-67.
VENDRAMIN FS, et al. Mastopexy Associated with Silicone Implants: Implant Support Technique with a Half-Cup Bra-Type Inferior Fascial Flap. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2025; 40: s00451810587.
XIN M, et al. A new type of dual-plane breast augmentation: Redefining parenchyma-muscle interface in high mobile glandular ptotic breast. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery. 2024; 94: 72-80.