Breast implants are placed into a pocket under the breast. The terms “above the muscle” and “below the muscle” are frequently bandied about. Which is better? Patients have opinions, surgeons have opinions. Certainly, I, a plastic surgeon who has performed a fair number of breast augmentations, have an opinion. Before I render than opinion, let’s review the pertinent anatomy.
Below the breast is the pectoralis major muscle. It is attached to the chest wall along the lower, inner portion of the breast, then along the entire side of the breast bone. The muscle spans across the chest like a triangle, and attached to the upper arm bone called the humerus. Below the muscle lies the chest wall, essentially the rib cage.
To place the implant under the muscle, a pocket is created by lifting the muscle off the underlying rib cage. The attachment of the muscle to the overlying breast remains undisturbed. To place the implant above the muscle, the breast is lifted off the underlying muscle. The attachment of the muscle to the underlying rib cage is undisturbed.
So, which is better? In either case, you have a pocket, and in that pocket you increase the size of the breast by inserting an implant. Theoretically, it should not make much difference. Theoretically yes, but in practice, quite the opposite. Consider the following:
1. The more soft tissue (breast and muscle are both examples of “soft tissue”) that is placed over the implant, the less visible and palpable the implant will be. If the patient has nice, thick, firm breast tissue, then it may not make too much difference which route you take. Certainly, if the tissue is naturally thin, or thinned out by atrophy after pregnancy and lactation, if will matter greatly which route of placement is utilized. Also, consider that with time, everyone (unfortunately) ages and that results in thinning (atrophy) of tissue.
2. The muscle is subject to less stretching that the skin and breast tissue. It acts like a stabilizer to prevent overstretching of the breast pocket (to some extent).
3. There is (according to my friends who are radiologists specializing in breast imaging) less interference with interpreting mammography when the implant is below the muscle. This statement is purely anecdotal and not based on any personal experience as I do not interpret mammograms.
4. It is no easier to place the implant above the muscle than below it, and probably requires a little more surgical effort, although not enough to make any difference to persuade the surgeon to choose below the muscle placement.
5. Despite the fact that the muscle is being partially cut with placement below the muscle, I do not believe that there is any more discomfort or downtime in using below the muscle placement. I utilize a rapid recovery method with below the muscle placement and my patients require no more than Advil for discomfort and are driving the next day.
So then, what is the reason surgeons choose to place implants above the muscle? There are a few reasons. The first may seem silly, but is in fact a reason surgeons choose to do what they do. The answer is “because that is what I was taught to do”, or “because that is how I have always done it and it works for me”. That is fine, but you cannot advance as a surgeon if you don’t keep yourself open to advances. Personally, I am always on the lookout for better ways to do things. It may take some getting used to when changing up to another technique, but if it is for the betterment of my patients, then why not? If I wasn’t progressive, then I would still be writing prescriptions for narcotics like Vicodin instead of just Advil after surgery, wrapping my patients is straps and bandages instead of just a small paper Steri-Strip and telling my patients they cannot raise their arms or drive for days or weeks instead of raising their arms high above their head while still on the recovery room stretcher and driving to their first follow up visit in my office the next day. That is a whole different story; my point is that a surgeon must be up to date on the latest techniques and methods.
There is one compelling reason why many surgeons place implants above the muscle. If you have a breast that has lactated, lost fullness in the upper portion and the glandular tissue is bottoming out (some of the breast tissue lies below the lower crease of the breast), then you have a special situation, one which is also very common. If you place an implant below the muscle, then the breast mound from the implant will lie up high, but the breast tissue will slide off the front of the implant and sag over the implant. From the side, this resembles the side view of the dog “Snoopy” from the Charlie Brown cartoons. The reason for this is that the muscle is preventing the implant from moving lower into the breast where there is some sagging. If you place the implant on top of the muscle, then you no longer have this problem. However, placing the implant above the muscle will result in some other potential problems: there is now much thinner tissue over the implant, so the implant will be more palpable and visible. Also, there will be less support of the shape of the breast without the muscle. Lastly, mammography may be more difficult.
A better solution is to place the implant under the muscle using a dual plane technique. In this technique, the muscle is repositioned superiorly in the breast pocket. There is a little less muscle coverage of the implant, but there still is muscle coverage of the upper portion of the implant nonetheless. The implant can now move into the lower pole (portion) of the breast and fill it out properly. All this with no need for a breast lift.
The dual plane technique will be the subject of a future blog on this website.