Abstract
Although several reports have been introduced about dual plane augmentation mammaplasty, the description of periareolar approach dual plane augmentation mammaplasty was few. This article describes specific characteristics, and different classification and techniques for the periareolar dual plane breast augmentation while postoperative scars resulted from inframammary crease approach caused complaints. A total of 124 patients(248 breasts) had periareolar dual plane augmentation surgery from 1998 to 2004. Anatomic implants were used in 43 cases. Most of the patients were satisfied with the outcomes of periareolar dual plane augmentation. Periareolar dual plane augmentation mammaplasty adjusts implant and tissue relationships to ensure adequate soft-tissue coverage while optimizing implant-breast parenchymal dynamics to offer increased benefits and fewer faults compared to a single pocket location in a wide range of breast types with minimal scars. Two types of dual plane classifications are discussed in this study for the periareolar approach exclusively. The boundaries of retroglandular dissection remain constant, as the costal origin of pectoralis major are divided. Type A dual plane implies that the inferior edge of pectoralis muscle lies below the inferior areolar border, and type B dual plane implies that the inferior edge lies above the superior areolar border.