Evaluation of results in aesthetic plastic surgery: preliminary observations on mammaplasty

Reduction Mammaplasty in Adolescents: A Comparison of Wise and Vertical Incision Patterns

Reduction mammaplasty was shown to ameliorate physical and psychological problems in adolescents suffering from macromastia. However, benefits of the Wise compared to the vertical incision pattern have not yet been established in this population. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of these 2 techniques in adolescents undergoing reduction mammaplasty.

Development of a computer-aided design software for the quantitative evaluation of aesthetic damage

Concerns associated with the assessment of aesthetic damage or injury raise critical difficulties, such as the scarcity of methodology and standardization that may result in fundamental precepts to establish impartial forms of compensation and aiming the total reparation of bodily injury. The complexity of the aesthetic damage evaluation is associated with the confluence of legal and technical perspectives and expert subjectivity while conducting examination and writing a report. Experts face additional difficulties associated with the objectivity while assessing aesthetic damage, independently on its location or expert skills, due to complex details observed in these lesions. Another situation in the clinical area, doctors (mainly plastic surgeons) and dentists could show the improvement or not, of the aesthetic condition to the patients. In health related areas, the use of information technology has contributed to increase the number of appropriate diagnoses, besides promoting quality, efficiency and satisfaction to health care providers. In order to make this assessment more objective, a technological tool was developed to aid experts in the evaluation of aesthetic damage and report elaboration. The objective was to develop computer-aided design software for aesthetic damage quantification/evaluation that is accessible via internet to be applied as a complementary report on body aesthetic damage. The software uses as a parameter the AIPE method, translated transculturally from Spanish to Portuguese and English. The present study allowed the construction of open access auxiliary software for the evaluation of corporal aesthetic damage. Its use is facilitated by intuitive and interactive filling, and the text may be customized by the user. It transforms the report into PDF and saves all evaluations already done in its own file. Information is encrypted for added security and confidentiality. The software is available on website at https://www.aestheticdamage.com.

The Danish Scale for visual rating of massive weight loss body contours. Conceptualization and construct

The 'Danish Scale' (DS) is a visual rating scale of massive weight loss body contour deformities and excessive skin in female MWL-patients with current BMI < 30 kg/m² and massive weight loss defined as BMI loss (delta-BMI) > 15 kg/m², regardless of weight loss method. The scope of the scale is to simplify the reporting of objective findings by a three-step grading of minor, moderate and severe body contour changes in six different body regions: breasts, abdomen, upper back, buttocks, arms and legs. The DS is presented with descriptions of the conceptualization and construct of the scale. It provides a new visual reference tool for indications and preoperative planning in MWL body contouring, that is specific for the post-MWL BMI-range between 21 and 30 kg/m² and, at the same time, simpler than previous scales. The scale combines evaluations of different and adjacent body regions in a simple manner and presents modern cut-off points for health insurance reimbursement for MWL body contouring as offered in the Danish public health care system. The DS was developed by repeat expert discussions until final nationwide consensus was reached and can act as an adjunct to the written guidelines by the National Board of Health in Denmark.

Psychological Assessment of Women on an Early Breast Screening Program after Radiotherapy to the Chest Wall for Childhood Cancer

Aims and Background

This study investigates the psychological status in a population of female patients who received chest irradiation for a childhood cancer and were screened for second primary breast cancer.

Methods

Sixty-eight consecutive such young women were included. Compilation of the Crown-Crisp Index questionnaire was requested and 49/68 patients accepted to fill it in; 14 women in the sample had children (28%).

Results

Twenty-seven of 49 patients achieved a normal score, whereas in 22 the score was slightly above the normal range in at least one scale. Pathological scores were more frequent among the women without children.

Conclusions

Quality of life in this series of long-term survivors does not seem to be severely affected by previous treatment for cancer nor by the concern for the onset of a second primary malignancy.

Augmentation mastopexy after bariatric surgery: evaluation of patient satisfaction and surgical results

ABSTRACT Objective: to evaluate patient satisfaction and surgical results obtained after mastopexy with breast implant inclusion. Methods: we conducted a prospective study of 20 consecutive female patients with a mean age of 39.9 years, submitted to augmentation mastopexy. We applied semi-directed psychological interviews pre and postoperatively. The answers to the evaluations were tabulated, categorized, and allowed patient satisfaction analysis. We evaluated surgical results through photographic analysis of three independent plastic surgeons, in the pre and postoperative periods, when scores were attributed to the following items: breasts shape, breasts volume, breasts symmetry, nipple-areolar complex position, and scar quality and extent. Results: nineteen patients (95%) referred satisfaction with the surgical results attained (p<0,001). The mean sum of the scores attributed by the three surgeons to each patient varied between 4.7 and 10, with an overall mean of 7.28. The results were considered good or great for 65% of the sample and poor for 8.4%. Conclusion: there was a 95% satisfaction rate among patients with the results obtained through augmentation mastopexy. The photographic analysis of the results obtained a mean score of 7.28, considered as a good result, albeit the weak correlation among evaluators.

Breast Reduction versus Breast Reduction Plus Implants: A Comparative Study with Measurements and Outcomes

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

Breast reduction is well-known to provide an improvement in physical symptoms. However, measurements show that this procedure is less effective in restoring upper-pole fullness. Breast implants effectively augment the upper pole. This study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness and safety of this treatment combination.

Methods:

This retrospective study consists of 3 parts: (1) a clinical study, (2) breast measurements, and (3) an outcome study. Eighty consecutive women undergoing breast reduction (n = 56) or breast reduction plus implants (n = 24) were evaluated. All breast implants were inserted submuscularly. All patients were treated with the same vertical reduction technique, using a medially based pedicle and intraoperative nipple positioning. Measurements were compared between preoperative photographs and photographs taken at least 3 months after surgery (n = 51). Patient surveys (n= 56) were evaluated.

Results:

There was no significant difference in complication or reoperation rates between groups. Both procedures elevated the breast mound and lower-pole level and increased the breast parenchymal ratio (upper-pole area/lower-pole area). Breast implants significantly increased upper-pole projection (P < 0.01). All surveyed patients who had simultaneous implants reported that they were pleased with their decision. Physical symptoms were reduced in both groups. Patient satisfaction was 92.5% for breast reduction and 93.8% for breast reduction plus implants. Both groups reported an improvement in quality of life.

Conclusions:

Vertical breast reduction with a medial pedicle may be combined safely and effectively with breast implants in patients who desire upper-pole fullness.

Inferior pole length and long-term aesthetic outcome after superior and inferior pedicled reduction mammaplasty

BACKGROUND

Long-term aesthetic results after reduction mammaplasty remain an important issue for evaluating the success of different techniques. Superior pedicled techniques are reported to maintain a better breast projection with less bottoming-out of the inferior mammary pole than inferior pedicled techniques.

METHODS

The outcomes of 18 patients who had undergone the superior pedicled technique described by Pitanguy and 16 patients operated on using the inferior pedicled technique by Robbins were compared.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 49 months in the Pitanguy group and 35 months in the Robbins group. The distance between the inframammary crease and the inferior margin of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) showed a mean elongation of 3.3 cm (80.5 %) after the superior pedicled Pitanguy technique and 3.9 cm (92.9 %) after the inferior pedicled Robbins technique (p = 0.077). Using postoperative photographs, the overall aesthetic result after Pitanguy's technique was judged significantly better than the result after Robbins' technique (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Distinct postoperative elongation of the inferior mammary pole length must be considered in the preoperative marking for inferior and superior pedicled reduction mammaplasty. Guide values for the elongation can be used for planning unilateral adjustment reduction mammaplasty. To avoid bottoming-out of the inferior mammary pole, the NAC should be located at the level of the inframammary crease and the distance between the inframammary crease and the inferior border of the NAC should not exceed 4-4.5 cm. The definite position of the NAC should be decided after final shaping of the reduced breast toward the end of the operation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article.

Three-dimensional evaluation of breast augmentation and the influence of anatomic and round implants on operative breast shape changes

BACKGROUND

Currently, postoperative outcome analysis in breast augmentation is essentially subjective, and objective evaluation of treatment efficacy is lacking. This study evaluates the influence of anatomic and round implant parameters on breast contour changes after subpectoral breast augmentation using three-dimensional (3D) surface imaging.

METHODS

3D surface breast scans of 17 patients (34 breasts) undergoing subpectoral breast augmentation with round implants and of ten patients (20 breasts) receiving anatomic implants via an axillary approach under endoscopic assistance or a submammary fold incision were obtained before and 6 months postoperatively. 3D linear distance, breast volume, and surface measurement were correlated with the implanted round and anatomic implant parameters, and the resulting breast shape changes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Total breast volume changed in correlation with the implant size (2.4% difference; r=0.894; p<0.001). Implant volume and type influence the nipple-to-inframammary fold distance (N-IMF). Every inserted 100 ml implant volume enlarges the N-IMF distance by 0.8 cm (anatomic>round; p=0.01). Postoperatively, the IMF dropped by an average of 1.3 cm for round implants and by 1.1 cm for anatomic implants, without relevant differences between the applied surgical incision and the selected implants (p>0.05). Breast projection increased significantly more with anatomic implants (2.4 cm) than with round implants (1.7 cm) (p=0.01). The breast projection increase was 22% less than expected for round implants and 25% less than expected for anatomic implants based on the manufacturer implant parameters (p<0.01), without essential differences regarding the surgical incision.

CONCLUSIONS

3D breast shape changes induced by round and anatomic implants after subpectoral augmentation mammaplasty are objectively documented including breast projection, volume, and N-IMF distance changes. 3D surface imaging may have a potential clinical contribution to objective surgical outcome research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors at www.springer.com/00266.

Evaluation of aesthetic abdominal surgery using a new clinical scale

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of outcomes after aesthetic surgery still is a challenge in plastic surgery. The evaluation frequently is based on subjective criteria. This study used a new clinical grading scale to evaluate aesthetic results for plastic surgeries to the abdomen. The method scores each of the following five parameters: volume of subcutaneous tissue, contour, excess of skin, aspect of the navel, and quality of the scar on the abdominal wall. The scale options are 0 (poor), 1 (fair), and 2 (good), and the total rate can range from 0 to 10.

METHODS

The study included 40 women ages 18-53 years. Of these 40 women, 20 underwent traditional abdominoplasty, and 20 had liposuction alone. Preoperatively and at least 1 year later, photographic results were analyzed and scored by three independent plastic surgeons.

RESULTS

In the abdominoplasty group, the average grade rose from 2.9±0.4 to 6.8±0.4 postoperatively. In the liposuction group, the average grade was 5.3±0.5 preoperatively and 7.7±0.4 postoperatively. In both groups, the average postoperative grade was significantly higher than the preoperative grade. The mean scores for groups A and L were significantly different, demonstrating that the scale was sensitive in identifying different anatomic abnormalities in the abdomen.

CONCLUSIONS

The rating scale used for the aesthetic evaluation of the abdomen was effective in the analysis of two different procedures: conventional abdominoplasty and liposuction. Abdominoplasty provided the greater gain according to a comparison of the pre- and postoperative scores.

Mammaplasty with inferior pedicle flap after massive weight loss

BACKGROUND

After massive weight loss, one of the stigmas that afflict women is the remaining deformity of the breasts which become flaccid and ptotic, with an absent or flat upper pole. The authors propose the use of a well-established mammaplasty technique to fill the upper pole, reshape the breast cone, and correct ptosis with nipple-areola complex (NAC) repositioning.

METHODS

A total of 16 patients were analyzed; all underwent gastroplasty between 18 and 24 months prior to mammaplasty. The mean age was 41.6 years (range = 26-62) and the mean BMI previous to the mammaplasty was 29.2 kg/m(2) (range = 24.9-38.9). The technique included a dermo-lipo glandular flap pedicled on the inframammary fold (IMF) together with a superior flap containing the NAC.

RESULTS

All patients who underwent surgery were satisfied with the outcomes since a more aesthetic breast shape was achieved, with projection of the upper pole and correction of ptosis. Adverse events included dehiscence at the junction point of the flaps in the inframammary fold, which resolved with secondary-intention wound healing in three patients; partial necrosis of the areola in one patient; epidermolysis in one of the NACs in one patient; and infection in one of the breasts in one patient, which resolved with proper antibiotic therapy.

CONCLUSION

When compared to the current mammaplasty techniques performed in formerly obese patients, this is a good surgical option because it uses tissues adjacent to the breast itself and does not require silicone prosthesis for breast augmentation. The patients reported increased self-esteem and improvement in their quality of life.

Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery are increasingly important for clinical research endeavors. Traditional surgical outcomes, centered on morbidity and mortality, remain important but are no longer sufficient on their own. Quality of life has become a crucial research topic augmenting traditional concerns focused on complications and survival. Given this, reliable and valid patient questionnaires are essential for aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgeons.

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic literature review to identify patient-reported outcome measures developed and validated for use in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery patients. Qualifying instruments were assessed for adherence to international guidelines for health outcomes instrument development and validation.

RESULTS

The authors identified 227 health outcomes questionnaires used in breast surgery studies. After 135 generic instruments, 65 ad hoc instruments, seven oncologic instruments, 11 education questionnaires, and two non-English-language questionnaires were excluded, seven measures remained. Detailed analysis revealed that six of the seven measures had undergone limited development and validation. Only one measure, the Breast-Related Symptoms Questionnaire, demonstrated adequate development and validation in its target population. It had, nevertheless, significant content limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Valid, reliable, and responsive instruments to measure patient-reported outcomes in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery are lacking. To demonstrate the benefits of aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery, future research to rigorously develop and validate new cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery-specific instruments is needed.

Is cosmetic surgery an effective psychotherapeutic intervention? A systematic review of the evidence

PURPOSE

Elective cosmetic surgery (ECS) in the absence of physical indications is often performed to improve psychosocial function. Third-party funders need evidence of its effectiveness if they are to respond in an evidence-based way to increasing demand in the context of constrained resources. Our first aim was to review recent evidence of psychosocial outcome in a way that was systematic with respect to study inclusion and methodological evaluation. Our second aim was to review evidence for the validity of currently used selection criteria.

METHOD

Electronic and manual literature and database search identified prospective cohort or controlled studies of psychosocial outcomes of surgery performed for appearance reasons reported in English from 1992 to 2004. Data were extracted to describe outcomes and evaluate methodological quality.

RESULTS

Twenty-three reports of 22 separate studies were reviewed. All were prospective observational studies and most provided low standards of evidence because of the absence of comparison groups, short follow-up periods and loss to follow-up. The evidence suggests that breast reduction improves health-related quality of life, but does not indicate enduring improvement in quality of life after other procedures, or enduring improvement in mental health, self-esteem or body image after any procedure. Similarly, there was insufficient evidence for the validity of criteria for patient selection. The negative conclusions reflect, not the existence of negative evidence, but methodological limitations of published research.

CONCLUSION

The problem for third-party funders is that, although evidence does not justify the continued general provision of ECS in the absence of physical need, it is not strong enough to justify withholding such treatment. Even though randomised controlled trials are probably impractical, we identify several improvements in design whereby future prospective cohort studies could provide higher standards of evidence.

Oncologic and Aesthetic Results Following Breast-Conserving Therapy with 0.5 cm Margins in 100 Consecutive Patients

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the oncologic and aesthetic results of patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy with 0.5 cm surgical margins and determine the factors that influence the need for reconstruction. One hundred consecutive patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery with 0.5 cm surgical margins followed by radiotherapy for invasive cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were followed prospectively and evaluated for recurrence and aesthetic result. Thirteen patients underwent reexcision to achieve a 0.5 cm margin. Factors including breast size, location of the tumor, specimen size and volume, tumor size and volume, and TNM stage, if axillary dissection or reexcision were required, were included in the analysis. Aesthetic evaluation consisted of both patient rating and an independent observer rating on a 10-point scale that assessed volume, shape, symmetry, areola/nipple, and scar. Of the 100 patients that underwent breast-conserving therapy, the overall aesthetic results revealed that 8% of the patients scored themselves seven or less, another 8% were scored seven or less by the independent observer, and another 7% were scored seven or less by both the patient and the observer. Of these patients, only one proceeded to have a reconstructive procedure. Analysis of variance revealed a significant correlation between tumor size (cm(2)) and an aesthetic score of seven or less (p = 0.023), and specimen volume (cm(3)) and an aesthetic score of seven or less (p = 0.039). Chi-squared analysis revealed a significant difference (chi(2) = 4.39, p < 0.5) in the aesthetic result in patients with stage IIA disease. Other independent factors such as age, breast size, location of the tumor, axillary dissection, and reexcision did not influence the overall aesthetic result. A Pearson correlation of patient and independent observer ratings showed a positive correlation (r = 0.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.57) between the two groups. There were zero local recurrences of breast cancer during the study period. Our results demonstrate that following breast-conserving therapy with a minimum of 0.5 cm resection margins, it is possible to achieve excellent oncologic and aesthetic results. Patients with large tumors that require a large volume of resection or with stage IIA disease should be considered for reconstructive evaluation.

Assessment of TRAM Aesthetics: The Importance of Subunit Integration

BACKGROUND

Characterization of optimal aesthetics in transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) breast reconstruction is a challenge that even the most experienced breast surgeon faces. Aesthetic assessment in breast surgery has attempted to evaluate the reconstructed breast either as one cohesive entity or as a sum of its parts. The authors propose that the most advantageous assessment involves looking at the reconstructions in terms of aesthetic components, not necessarily in visual subunits.

METHODS

The authors investigated the responses of five physicians and 12 nonphysician evaluators using various methods of aesthetic assessment, including, most importantly, a visual analogue scale survey. Pearson's correlation and intraclass correlation analyses were performed using SAS software.

RESULTS

Their analysis determined that while all components of TRAM reconstruction were important, symmetry, contour, and breast positioning were consistently named the most important components of breast reconstruction. When the breast reconstruction was divided into aesthetic subunits, there was a high degree of correlation between the overall score and the subunit scores (r = 0.81: r > 0.6 for good correlation).

CONCLUSIONS

From these assessments, the authors derived a set of aesthetic rules for TRAM flap reconstruction. They believe that methodical application of these rules on a consistent basis can lead to the production of maximal aesthetic outcomes in TRAM breast reconstruction.

Simplifying the vertical reduction mammaplasty

The vertical reduction mammaplasty is an evolving technique. Its proponents report significantly decreased scarring, better breast shape, and more stable results compared with the standard inverted-T method, but the learning curve is long and cosmetic outcomes can be inconsistent. Many surgeons have experimented with the vertical closure before returning to methods more familiar to them. The authors present their modifications to the vertical reduction mammaplasty. Their changes simplify the preoperative markings and the intraoperative technique to shorten the learning curve while maintaining reliable aesthetic results. With the patient standing, only four preoperative marks are made: (1) the inframammary fold; (2) the breast axis; (3) the apex of the new nipple-areola complex; and (4) the medial and lateral limbs of the vertical incision. In the operating room, a medial or a superomedial pedicle is developed. Excess breast skin is resected with the inferior and lateral parenchyma as a C-shaped wedge. The lateral skin-adipose flap is redraped inferomedially and sutured to the chest wall. The inferior aspect of the breast is aggressively debulked and a gathering subcuticular stitch is started 2 cm below the nadir of the nipple-areola complex. Finally, a 38-mm to 42-mm nipple-areola complex marker is used to create a circular defect that is offset 0.5 cm medial to the vertical axis of the breast. In their series, 56 patients were treated and no major complications were noted. The median follow-up period was 17 months. The average reduction was 554.5 g per breast; however, the reduction was greater than 1000 g per breast in eight patients. The authors found that (1) chest wall anchoring improves lateral contour and minimizes axillary fullness; (2) aggressive debulking inferiorly avoids the persistent inferior bulge; and (3) starting the subcuticular gathering suture 2 cm below the nipple-areola complex followed by placement of a nipple-areola complex marker at the conclusion of the case prevents lateral deviation and corrects the nipple-areola complex teardrop deformity. These innovations accelerate the learning curve by simplifying the preoperative markings and lead to more consistent postoperative results and an improved cosmetic outcome. In conclusion, these modifications yield a simple, easily learned vertical reduction mammaplasty with aesthetically reliable results.

Benefits and pitfalls of vertical scar breast reduction

A quality assurance study was undertaken three years after beginning the vertical scar breast reduction technique. We examined the rate of early and late complications (major and minor) and compared these to the formerly used inverted-T scar and L scar breast reduction techniques. Inverted-T scar breast reductions have an early complication rate of up to 20% and a late complication rate of 20-30%. Our vertical scar breast reduction is a modified Lassus technique, incorporating a geometrically based and measurable preoperative marking of the breast, a superior pedicle, a central breast resection, an intraoperative positioning of the nipple-areola complex, and occasionally a periareolar skin resection.In the time span examined (September 1998-December 2001) 153 patients could be included in the study. The resection weight per breast ranged from 60 to 1262 g (mean 390+/-210 g, median 380 g). The early complication rate (hematoma, seroma, wound dehiscence, wound infection and necrosis) was 21.6%. Of these cases, 19.6% were minor complications. The late complication or imperfection rate was evaluated very strictly using the standardized, extended scheme of Ferreira (problems of volume, shape, symmetry, areola, scars and position of the breast on the thorax) and was 26%. Major late complications necessitating a reoperation occurred in 11.1% of cases. These complication rates compare well to those of other vertical breast reduction techniques and T scar reductions in our own clinic and in the literature. Given that the vertical scar breast reduction method also results in shorter scars and a significantly better, long-lasting breast projection, this technique is clearly justified to remain the standard method at our clinic.

Differences in breast shape preferences between plastic surgeons and patients seeking breast augmentation

There has been little discussion in the published literature regarding breast shape preferences. This study was conducted to ascertain previously undocumented differences in breast shape preferences between plastic surgeons and patients seeking breast augmentation, with respect to upper-pole contour. Sixty-six respondents, grouped into three cohort categories (plastic surgeons, breast augmentation patients, and lay people), were asked to evaluate a series of 12 nonptotic breast profiles representing a range of upper-pole contours. Five profiles exhibited convex upper-pole contours, five exhibited concave contours, and two exhibited upper poles with flat slopes. A five-point Likert-type scale was used to rate attractiveness, naturalness, how close the shape was to each respondent's personal ideal, and how close the shape was to what the respondent believed was our society's ideal. Statistical comparisons were made among the three cohorts. The plastic surgeon cohort (n = 11) rated concave upper-pole contours significantly higher than did the patient cohort (n = 13) for attractiveness, naturalness, and personal ideal (p < 0.01). For convex contours, the plastic surgeon cohort gave significantly lower scores than did the patient cohort (p < 0.01). The lay category (n = 42) demonstrated preferences intermediate between those of the other groups. There are no known studies in the literature documenting the breast shape preferences of plastic surgeons and their patients. This study suggests that plastic surgeons and patients seeking breast augmentation may have drastically different images in mind regarding what constitutes an attractive, natural, and ideal breast shape. These findings have potential implications for patient treatment and satisfaction.

Sensibility of the breast after reduction mammaplasty

Changes in breast sensibility after reduction mammaplasty remain a controversial subject and most previous studies report only qualitative results. There is more accurate measuring of the sensibility of the skin with the Pressure-Specified Sensory Device (PSSD), which measures the pressure perception of the skin in grams per square millimeter. The evaluation of breast sensibility before and after reduction mammaplasty using the upper medial pedicle technique was undertaken in 25 patients. The PSSD was used to measure one dynamic point threshold in nine points of the breast during the preoperative period and 6 months after surgery. After surgery all patients had decreased sensation in all points studied, and this was significant. There are few reports of breast sensibility after mammaplasty using the PSSD, and the discrepancy in results reported using other methods of evaluation could be related to precision in evaluation.

Outcome study: periareolar mammaplasty patients' perspective

Residual scars on occasion compromise patient satisfaction with breast reduction procedures. Periareolar breast reduction was proposed to minimize the scarring produced by the operation. This technique was criticized predominantly for producing a breast with low projection, for recurrence of ptosis after surgery, and for widening of the periareolar scar. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction from this technique. In the first branch of the study, 11 patients who had periareolar or circumareolar breast reduction were compared with 13 patients who had vertical scar reduction mammaplasty. The groups were matched for patient's age, size of reduction, and follow-up period. The patients were contacted by phone and requested to comment on four aspects of their operation: breast size, symmetry, quality of scars, and appearance and position of the nipple-areola complex. The replies were converted to numerical values and analyzed statistically. A panel of three women, prospective patients for breast reduction, were presented with standardized five-view before-and-after photographs and requested to score the results using the same criteria. Their responses were analyzed in the same manner. Both phases of the study produced similar results. Breast reduction done through a periareolar scar scored higher than a vertical scar technique. The operation did not differ with respect to shape, symmetry, or nipple-areola shape but did with respect to dissatisfaction with scars, which affected the overall result. This experimental model of assessing results of cosmetic operations is proposed as a tool to assess the patient's rather than the surgeon's perspective of a surgical technique, and it could find application in assessing other cosmetic operations.