Bi-plane breast augmentation: a case series supporting its use and benefits

Abstract

Aim: Breast augmentation has traditionally been performed in either the subglandular or submuscular plane. Dual plane augmentation has been described before and captures the advantages of both of these techniques but reduces the trade-offs. The biplane muscle splitting technique adopts the similar advantages seen with the dual plane method without the need for extensive costal muscle fibre release at the infra-mammary fold.

Methods: Thirty-five patients underwent bilateral breast augmentation using the biplanar technique from November 2007 to December 2008. All operations were performed by the senior author and followed up prospectively.

Results: Follow up ranged from 9 months to 21 months. All of the patients achieved precise and reliable implant placement with no revisions or patient dissatisfaction. There have been no cases of implant misplacement/migration; synmastia, dynamic breast deformity, capsular contracture or infections. A single case of unilateral haematoma occurred early in the series.

Conclusion: Our operative cases and early follow-up supports the use of this novel biplanar technique for breast augmentation. It optimizes the advantages of subglandular and submuscular breast augmentation with simpler dissection and less complications than other submuscular techniques. It can be used in a wide variety of breast types with predictable results.

Keywords

Biplane / dual-plane / breast augmentation / submuscular implants / muscle splitting augmentation

References

[1] Tebbetts JB.Dual plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant-soft-tissue relationships in a wide range of breast types..Plast Reconstr Surg2001;107:1255-72

[2] Luan J,Mu L.Transaxillary dual-plane augmentation mammaplasty: experience with 98 breasts..J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg2009;62:1459-63

[3] Spear SL,Ganz JC.The correction of capsular contracture by conversion to "dual-plane" positioning: technique and outcomes..Plast Reconstr Surg2003;112:456-66

[4] Khan UD.Muscle-splitting breast augmentation: a new pocket in a different plane..Aesth Plast Surg2007;31:553-8

[5] Biggs TM.Augmentation mammaplasty: a comparative analysis..Plast Reconstr Surg1990;85:368-72

[6] Khan UD.Vertical scar mastopexy with cat's tail extension for prevention of skin redundancy: an experience with 17 consecutive cases following mastopexy and mastopexy with breast augmentation..Aesthetic Plast Surg2012;36:303-7

[7] Khan UD.Augmentation mastopexy in muscle-splitting biplane: outcome of first 44 consecutive cases of mastopexies in a new pocket..Aesth Plast Surg2010;34:313-21

[8] Khan UD.Multiplane technique for simultaneous submuscular breast augmentation and internal glandulopexy using inframammary crease incision in selected patients with early ptosis..Eur J Plast Surg2010;34:337-43

[9] Lang Stumpfle R,Alves Valiati A.Transaxillary muscle-Splitting breast augmentation: experience with 160 Cases..Aesth Plast Surg2012;36:343-8

[10] Khan UD.Combining muscle-splitting biplane with multilayer capsulorraphy for the correction of bottoming down following subglandular augmentation..Eur J Plast Surg2010;33:259-69

[11] Khan UD.Mugea TT.Subglandular to Muscle Splitting Biplane Conversion for Revision Augmentation Mammoplasty..Aesthetic Surgery of the Breast. 1st ed.2015;BerlinSpringer535-41

[12] Khan UD.Correction of acquired synmastia with of with muscle-splitting biplane implant replacement..Aesth Plast Surg2009;33:605-10

[13] Khan UD.Dynamic breasts: a common complication following partial submuscular augmentation and its correction using muscle-splitting biplane technique..Aesth Plast Surg2009;33:353-60

[14] Khan UD.High transverse capsuloplasty for the correction of malpositioned implants following augmentation mammoplasty in partial submuscular plane..Aesth Plast Surg2012;36:590-9

[15] Khan UD.Muscle-splitting, subglandular and partial submuscular augmentation mammoplasties: a 12-year retrospective analysis of 2026 primary cases..Aesth Plast Surg2013;37:290-302