Search In this Thesis
   Search In this Thesis  
العنوان
DIFFERENT MODALITIES OF BREAST AUGMENTATION MAMMOPLASTY
المؤلف
Zurub,Shehta Mostafa Shehta ,
هيئة الاعداد
باحث / Shehta Mostafa Shehta Zurub
مشرف / Allaa Abbas Sabry
مشرف / Hossam EL Sadek Ibrahiim
مشرف / Ahmed Fathy EL Sherif
الموضوع
Breast augmentation
تاريخ النشر
2011
عدد الصفحات
143.p:
اللغة
الإنجليزية
الدرجة
ماجستير
التخصص
جراحة
تاريخ الإجازة
1/1/2011
مكان الإجازة
جامعة عين شمس - كلية الطب - General Surgery
الفهرس
Only 14 pages are availabe for public view

from 143

from 143

Abstract

The female breast has a diverse physiology that makes accurate reproducible measurements of this organ very difficult. Physiological changes as puberty, ovulation, gestation and lactation affect breast shape. It is a three-dimensional soft tissue structure that is anchored to a bony and muscular framework but does not remain constant over time.
Mugea, (2001) quoted that the aesthetically perfect breast was one for which no common aesthetic procedures would be suggested. It is perfectly fit with a perfect body, in perfect harmony regarding proportion, position, and projection. This is the “top model” situation.
There has been variable techniques of breast augmentation (periareolar, inframammary, transaxillary and transumbilical approaches) currently fit the needs of the variously shaped patients in our population. Although there is no one single technique that is considered “the best,” one must take the options that are available in conjunction with the physical examination of the patient to create a sound surgical plan for achieving an aesthetic looking augmented breast (Spear et al., 2004).
We must always strive to create the breast that is appropriate for the patient’s body shape. Therefore, it is important to do anthropomorphic measurements on all women to see if we ultimately achieve our goals as noted by Westreich, (2009).
Surgeons performing breast augmentation have to be well informed, not only about the variety of techniques that are available but also about the possible risks and complications of the procedure. Shiffman (2009) monitored that the surgeon should be capable of deciding which procedure to use to correct any defect or deformity and of avoiding or treating the variety of possible complications of the surgery. The patient should understand that the possibility exists for a second or even third procedure on the breast after augmentation.
Maliniac, (1950) statement is as true today as it was: The surgeon’s sense of sculptural form must dictate the ultimate decision as to the placement and shape of the breasts.