↓ Skip to main content

“The Chignon Mastopexy”: A Double Glandular Suspended Flaps for an Auto-Augmentation Effect

Overview of attention for article published in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
“The Chignon Mastopexy”: A Double Glandular Suspended Flaps for an Auto-Augmentation Effect
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00266-017-0985-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bouraoui Kotti

Abstract

Many mastopexy techniques have been described in the literature focusing on the new nipple areolar complex position and the breast deflation treatment, but only few of them detailed the glandular volume redistribution to avoid the use of implants. We describe a mastopexy procedure that brings the maximum of the volume to the central part of the breast. We compare the procedure to a "chignon" hair style way to vulgarize the technique and simplify its comprehension. Breast volume is reshaped by the use of a vertical mastopexy and two deepithelized glandular flaps sutured for the first one to the pectoralis major fascia and for the second one to the contralateral flap. A lateral release of two fasciocutaneous flaps allows the final vertical suture. From January 2011 to January 2016, 30 patients, between 85 operated on for ptotic breasts, were treated with this technique. The follow-up period is from 6 months to 5 years. Esthetic improvement in the breast shape and its projection were achieved in 90%. The illusion of augmentation of the final volume was noticed in 70% of the cases. No complications were noticed during this study. We describe an easy and reliable technique for breast lift, based on a mastopexy method that changes the architecture of the breast to bring the maximum of its volume to the central part. The technique is rewarding for moderate volumes when the ptosis is more related to a glandular sagging than to a cutaneous looseness and breast deflation. 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 Table of Contents or Online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Unknown 7 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,484,498
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
#713
of 1,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,463
of 331,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
#10
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,232 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,175 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.