Symmetrical height of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) is a key factor in the perception of breast symmetry. For preoperative markings, we mainly rely on conventional anthropometric measurements of distances in correlation to anatomical landmarks. In this study, we evaluated whether the use of a class 2 laser projection water level would lead to better symmetry of nipple height in reduction mammoplasty procedures when used for preoperative planning. We analysed 100 patients undergoing reduction mammoplasty with a supero-medial pedicle and wise-pattern skin resection. We compared the bilateral differences in nipple height of the last 50 reduction mammoplasty procedures before using the laser projection water level (group A; no laser) with the first 50 reduction mammoplasties after implementation of this device (group B; laser). The follow-up period was 12 months. A total of 48 patients were included in group A and 44 patients in group B. Patient demographics, mean resection weight and complications did not differ statistically significantly. Nipple height differences were significantly lower in group B (laser), measuring 0.22 ± 0.20 cm (0-0.9; n = 44), than those in group A (no laser; p < 0.001), measuring 0.61 ± 0.28 cm (0.2-1.2; n = 49). Using laser level projection helped improve nipple height symmetry in reduction mammoplasty. We consider a difference of more than 1 cm in nipple height to be unacceptable in aesthetic reduction mammoplasty. This simple tool facilitates preoperative markings, and we find it to be safe, quick to install and very helpful in daily practice.

Methods for assessing three-dimensional (3D) breast volume are becoming increasingly popular in breast surgery. However, the precision of intraoperative volumetric assessment is still unclear. Until now, only non-validated scanning systems have been used for intraoperative volumetric analyses. This study aimed to assess the feasibility, handling, and accuracy of a commercially available, validated, and portable device for intraoperative 3D volumetric evaluation. All patients who underwent breast surgery from 2020 to 2022 were identified from our institutional database. Intraoperative 3D volumetric assessments of 103 patients were included in this study. Standardized 3D volumetric measurements were obtained 3 months postoperatively to compare the intraoperatively generated volumetric assessment. All of the study participants were women with a mean age of 48.3 ± 14.7 years (range: 20–89). The mean time for intraoperative volumetric assessment was 8.7 ± 2.6 min. The postoperative 3D volumetric assessment, with a mean volume of 507.11 ± 206.29 cc, showed no significant difference from the intraoperative volumetric measurements of 504.24 ± 276.61 cc (p = 0.68). The mean absolute volume difference between the intraoperative simulations and postoperative results was 27.1 cc. Intraoperative 3D volumetric assessment using the VECTRA H2 imaging system seems to be a feasible, reliable, and accurate method for measuring breast volume. Based on this finding, we plan to investigate whether volumetric objective evaluations will help to improve breast symmetry in the future.

(1) Background: Three-dimensional (3D) volumetric assessment is receiving increased recognition in breast surgery. It is commonly used for preoperative planning and postoperative control with the patient standing in an upright position. Recently, intraoperative use was evaluated with patients in the supine position. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the volumetric changes in 3D surface imaging depending on the patient’s position. (2) Methods: 3D volumetric analysis was performed using a Vectra-H2 device with patients in standing, sitting, and supine positions. A total of 100 complete datasets of female breasts were included in the study. The measured volumes of each evaluated breast (n = 200) were compared between the three positions. (3) Results: The mean difference between the 3D volumetric assessments of the sitting and standing positions per breast was 7.15 cc and, thus, statistically insignificant (p = 0.28). However, the difference between supine and standing positions, at 120.31 cc, was significant (p < 0.01). (4) Conclusions: The 3D volumetric assessment of breasts in the supine position did not statistically correlate with the validated assessment of breast volume in the standing position while breast volume in the sitting position is reliable and correlates with the assessment of a standing patient. We conclude that intraoperative volumetric assessment should be performed with patients in an upright sitting position.

Several studies have attempted to identify the optimal anthropometric measurement for the aesthetically ideal positioning of the nipple–areolar complex. However, no standardised solutions and measurements for planning surgical procedures have been reached. The aim of this study is to identify the optimal anthropometric measurement between the suprasternal notch (SSN)–nipple distance and mid-clavicle (MC)–nipple distance for the aesthetic position of the nipple–areola complex (NAC) on the breast. A detailed online survey was sent to 300 board-certified plastic surgeons and residents of plastic surgery departments of hospitals in German, Austrian, and Swiss. A similar survey was also provided to 100 patients who had planned or had already undergone breast surgery. All participants were asked to rank the attractiveness of a series of women’s breasts in images with different NAC position measurements. The images showed breasts from two different measurements and distances: all the breasts had equal dimensions and proportions and the same areola size. Complete datasets were obtained from 203 of the 300 board-certified plastic surgeons and residents of plastic surgery departments in German-speaking countries (recall 68%) and from 100 patients. The majority of doctors and patients find a symmetrical breast with a mirrored position of the nipple–areola complex more attractive than a non-symmetrical breast. In cases with minor measurement differences, such as 0.5 cm (SSN vs. MC), there is no relevant difference in the breast symmetry. However, at larger distances, the MC-to-nipple distance is superior for achieving aesthetically appealing symmetry compared with the SSN-to-nipple distance. Using the MC-to-nipple distance seems to be superior for correct nipple positioning than the SSN-to-nipple distance and is a valuable preoperative measurement option for breast symmetry with correct nipple height. Further studies on this topic involving a more general population should be conducted to confirm the improvements in perception with the preoperative measurements using the anatomical landmarks.

AI, especially ChatGPT, is impacting healthcare through applications in research, patient communication, and training. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine ChatGPT-4’s ability to analyze images of lower leg defects and assesses its understanding of complex case reports in comparison to the performance of board-certified surgeons and residents. We conducted a cross-sectional survey in Switzerland, Germany, and Austria, where 52 participants reviewed images depicting lower leg defects within fictitious patient profiles and selected the optimal reconstruction techniques. The questionnaire included cases with varied difficulty, and answer options did not always include the most obvious choices. Findings highlight that ChatGPT-4 successfully evaluated various reconstruction methods but struggled to determine the optimal solution based on the available information in visual and written forms. A chi-squared test of independence was performed to investigate the overall association between answer options (A, B, C, and D) and rater group (board-certified surgeons, ChatGPT-4, and resident). Inter-group rater associations showed significant overall test results (p < 0.001), with high agreement among board-certified surgeons. Our results suggest that board-certified plastic surgeons remain essential for patient-specific treatment planning, while AI can support decision-making. This reaffirms the role of AI as a supportive tool, rather than a replacement, in reconstructive surgery.