Three-Dimensional Surface Imaging is an Effective Tool for Measuring Breast Volume: A Validation Study

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Background Accurate breast volume assessment is a prerequisite to preoperative planning, as well as intraoperative decision making in breast reconstruction surgery. The use of three-dimensional surface imaging (3D scanning) to assess breast volume has many advantages. However, before employing 3D scanning in the field, the tool's validity should be demonstrated. The purpose of this study was to confirm the validity of 3D-scanning technology for evaluating breast volume.

Methods We reviewed the charts of 25 patients who underwent breast reconstruction surgery immediately after total mastectomy. Breast volumes using the Axis Three 3D scanner, water-displacement technique, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were obtained bilaterally in the preoperative period. During the operation, the tissue removed during total mastectomy was weighed and the specimen volume was calculated from the weight. Then, we compared the volume obtained from 3D scanning with those obtained using the water-displacement technique, MRI, and the calculated volume of the tissue removed.

Results The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of breast volumes obtained from 3D scanning, as compared to the volumes obtained using the water-displacement technique and specimen weight, demonstrated excellent reliability. The ICC of breast volumes obtained using 3D scanning, as compared to those obtained by MRI, demonstrated substantial reliability. Passing-Bablok regression showed agreement between 3D scanning and the water-displacement technique, and showed a linear association of 3D scanning with MRI and specimen volume, respectively.

Conclusions When compared with the classical water-displacement technique and MRI-based volumetry, 3D scanning showed significant reliability and a linear association with the other two methods.

This article was presented at the 2014 Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons International on November 7–9, 2014 in Seoul, Korea.

Publication History

Received: 28 March 2016

Accepted: 31 August 2016

Article published online:
20 April 2022

© 2016. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

• REFERENCES

• 1 Yip JM, Mouratova N, Jeffery RM. et al. Accurate assessment of breast volume: a study comparing the volumetric gold standard (direct water displacement measurement of mastectomy specimen) with a 3D laser scanning technique. Ann Plast Surg 2012; 68: 135-141
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Campaigne BN, Katch VL, Freedson P. et al. Measurement of breast volume in females: description of a reliable method. Ann Hum Biol 1979; 6: 363-367
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Edsander-Nord A, Wickman M, Jurell G. Measurement of breast volume with thermoplastic casts. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 1996; 30: 129-132
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Schultz RC, Dolezal RF, Nolan J. Further applications of Archimedes' principle in the correction of asymmetrical breasts. Ann Plast Surg 1986; 16: 98-101
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Bouman FG. Volumetric measurement of the human breast and breast tissue before and during mammaplasty. Br J Plast Surg 1970; 23: 263-264
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Wilmore JH, Atwater AE, Maxwell BD. et al. Alterations in breast morphology consequent to a 21-day bust developer program. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1985; 17: 106-112
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Smith Jr DJ, Palin Jr WE, Katch VL. et al. Breast volume and anthropomorphic measurements: normal values. Plast Reconstr Surg 1986; 78: 331-335
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Westreich M. Anthropomorphic breast measurement: protocol and results in 50 women with aesthetically perfect breasts and clinical application. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 100: 468-479
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Rha EY, Choi IK, Yoo G. Accuracy of the method for estimating breast volume on three-dimensional simulated magnetic resonance imaging scans in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 133: 14-20
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Neal AJ, Torr M, Helyer S. et al. Correlation of breast dose heterogeneity with breast size using 3D CT planning and dose-volume histograms. Radiother Oncol 1995; 34: 210-218
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Kalbhen CL, McGill JJ, Fendley PM. et al. Mammographic determination of breast volume: comparing different methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173: 1643-1649
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Malini S, Smith EO, Goldzieher JW. Measurement of breast volume by ultrasound during normal menstrual cycles and with oral contraceptive use. Obstet Gynecol 1985; 66: 538-541
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Parmar C, West M, Pathak S. et al. Weight versus volume in breast surgery: an observational study. JRSM Short Rep 2011; 2: 87
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Bland JM, Altman DG. Correlation, regression, and repeated data. BMJ 1994; 308: 896
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Passing H. Bablok. A new biometrical procedure for testing the equality of measurements from two different analytical methods. Application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in clinical chemistry, Part I. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1983. 21. 709-720
  Google Scholar
• 17 Bulstrode N, Bellamy E, Shrotria S. Breast volume assessment: comparing five different techniques. Breast 2001; 10: 117-123
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Herold C, Ueberreiter K, Cromme F. et al. The use of mamma MRI volumetry to evaluate the rate of fat survival after autologous lipotransfer. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 2010; 42: 129-134
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Eder M, Kovacs L. Commentary on the article of Herold et al.: The use of mamma MRI volumetry to evaluate the rates of fat survival after autologous lipotransfer. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 2010; 42: 135-136
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Mineyev M, Kramer D, Kaufman L. et al. Measurement of breast implant volume with magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Plast Surg 1995; 34: 348-351
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Keys KA, Louie O, Said HK. et al. Clinical utility of CT angiography in DIEP breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013; 66: e61-e65
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Ohkuma R, Mohan R, Baltodano PA. et al. Abdominally based free flap planning in breast reconstruction with computed tomographic angiography: systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 133: 483-494
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Teunis T, Heerma van Voss MR, Kon M. et al. CT-angiography prior to DIEP flap breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Microsurgery 2013; 33: 496-502
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Lee KT, Mun GH. Volumetric planning using computed tomographic angiography improves clinical outcomes in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137: 771e-780e
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Kovacs L, Eder M, Hollweck R. et al. Comparison between breast volume measurement using 3D surface imaging and classical techniques. Breast 2007; 16: 137-145
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Losken A, Seify H, Denson DD. et al. Validating three-dimensional imaging of the breast. Ann Plast Surg 2005; 54: 471-476
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar