eMedicine Specialties > Plastic Surgery > Breast

Breast Reduction, Lejour

Author: Antonio Espinosa-de-los-Monteros, MD, Staff Physician, Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Alabama, Birmingham
Coauthor(s): Jorge I de la Torre, MD, FACS, Professor of Surgery and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Residency Program Director, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham; Director, Center for Advanced Surgical Aesthetics
Contributor Information and Disclosures

Updated: Sep 30, 2009

Introduction

Breast reduction is one of the most common procedures performed by plastic surgeons in North America, South America, and Europe. Breast reduction is the surgical treatment of macromastia, a condition that is defined by the presence of enlarged and heavy breasts.

The weight and size of the breast can be reduced using various surgical techniques. Two main technical aspects have to be considered when detailing surgical options for reduction mammaplasty. One aspect is the pattern of the skin incision/excision used to gain access to the breast parenchyma to be removed. These skin incisions, and the skin area that is to be excised, ultimately describe the location and length of the final scars. The second aspect to be considered is the area/pedicle of breast parenchyma to be left in the patient after the glandular excision is complete. The pedicle selected by the surgeon will have a discrete vascular and nerve supply and is very important in determining final breast shape, since each pedicle technique has known and differing strengths and weaknesses.

Preoperative view, Lejour reduction mammaplasty.

Preoperative view, Lejour reduction mammaplasty.

Preoperative view, Lejour reduction mammaplasty.

Preoperative view, Lejour reduction mammaplasty.


Postoperative view, 400-g Lejour reduction perfor...

Postoperative view, 400-g Lejour reduction performed by Dr Glynn Bolitho, San Diego, Calif.

Postoperative view, 400-g Lejour reduction perfor...

Postoperative view, 400-g Lejour reduction performed by Dr Glynn Bolitho, San Diego, Calif.


History of the Procedure

Diverse methods of skin incision and excision existed in the early reports of breast reduction. Some of them were improvised during the surgery, others were planned based on empiric knowledge, and a few followed complicated geometric calculations. In 1956, Robert Wise published on his experience with a refined pattern that he had previously designed in the form of a key-hole.1 The Wise pattern has been the workhorse for skin incision for breast reduction for several decades. It leaves an anchor-shaped scar in a periareolar circle, a vertical scar in the midline of the inferior mammary hemisphere, and a curvilinear scar along the inframammary fold that follows the curved shape of the inferior pole of the breast.

In 1972, Paul McKissock modified Wise's technique by increasing the length of the vertical limbs of the design to try to compensate for the flat lower pole that was being achieved.2 It is now recognized that McKissock’s technique tends to result in the opposite effect, which is a bottoming-out and is not very well tolerated by patients and surgeons.

To date, the Wise pattern remains the most common method of skin excision performed in the United States, although current trends show surgeons favoring other methods that have been designed with the purposes of shortening and hiding the scar. In South America and Europe, such methods have been very well developed over the years and represent the most common method of skin incision for breast reduction. Among these shorter-scars techniques, the mosque dome pattern of skin incision has gained greatest acceptance. It eliminates the lower curvilinear scar seen with the use of the Wise pattern, leaving only a periareolar scar and a vertical scar along the midline of the lower hemisphere of the breast. For this reason, the technique has been called vertical scar, and breast reductions using this pattern of skin incision are denominated vertical reduction mammaplasties.

The vertical scar incision pattern was originally designed by Claude Lassus in 1964 and reported in 1970, with the particularity that the inferior portion of the vertical scar ended up extending below the inframammary fold.3 Lassus corrected this by adding a small horizontal scar along the inframammary fold.4 Later on, he realized that the small horizontal scar ended up migrating up toward the lower hemisphere of the breast. He subsequently redefined his pattern of skin excision until achieving one that left only a vertical scar above the inframammary fold.5 This is the skin incision that is used in the technique described by Lejour.

The advantages of this pattern of skin incision are that it leaves no scar along the inframammary fold and it reduces the risk of skin edge necrosis at the inferior aspect of the closure, where tension is greatest and skin flap vascular inflow occurs over the longest distance from its source. (Skin edge necrosis was a particular risk at the junction of the inverted T incision of the Wise pattern technique).

With regard to the pattern of glandular resection, the different techniques used in breast reduction are identified by the segment of the breast that is left unresected, which becomes the structure and support of the new breast. This "pedicle" also contains the vascular supply that will nourish the breast mound, including the nipple-areola complex. Various techniques include superior, superomedial, medial, inferior, lateral and central pedicles. Bipedicle techniques, which include either superior and inferior or lateral and medial aspects of the breast, are also used.

For information on other breast reduction techniques, see eMedicine articles Breast Reduction, Central Pedicle; Breast Reduction, Inferior Pedicle; Breast Reduction, Moufarr è ge Total Posterior Pedicle; Breast Reduction, Simplified Vertical; Breast Reduction, Superior Pedicle; and Breast Reduction, Vertical Bipedicle.

Each technique has advantages and disadvantages. The superior pedicle method (which involves the resection of the medial, lateral, and inferior portions of the breast parenchyma) was originally described by Daniel Weiner in 1973.6 Initially, it gained more popularity in Europe than in North and South America. It was thought to put at risk the sensation of the nipple-areola complex because of the belief that it transected the lateral branches of the fourth intercostal nerve. The sensory branches to the nipple-areola complex are now known to run deep at the level of the chest wall and perforate superficially through the breast parenchyma to reach to nipple areola complex. For this reason, keeping parenchymatous resections just above the level of the chest wall preserves the nerve supply to the nipple-areola complex and, thus, its sensation.

Another reason for which this method of parenchyma resection was not widely approved was the thinking that the vascular pedicle may get kinked or compressed while folding the dermoglandular portion of the breast over to inset the areola up on its new location. Currently, good evidence exists supporting the knowledge that the breast is adequately supplied by the superior dermoglandular pedicle that results as a consequence of this pattern of parenchyma resection.

For this reason, trends exist in North America and South America toward performing superior pedicle techniques of breast reduction more often than in the past. This is the pattern of resection used in the Lejour technique. Its advantages are that it preserves the area that is less prone to undergo further ptosis secondary to downward pulling action of gravity, as well as maintaining fullness in the upper pole of the breast while allowing for small, medium, and large resections.

In 1994, Madeleine Lejour reported on 153 reduction mammaplasties using this technique in 79 patients.7 Later, she updated her experience on 324 reductions performed in 167 patients.8 Several studies on the use of this technique have been published since.

Presentation

Patients with macromastia present to the clinic with enlarged breasts that tend to be ptotic and that cause chest, neck, back and shoulder pain; difficulty performing deep inspirations; and the inability to fit into proper clothing. Patients may show shoulder indentations from the brassiere and inframammary intertrigo.

A complete medical history has to be obtained, including age, information on childbearing and breastfeeding, future pregnancy and nursing plans, smoking history, concomitant diseases, history of breast diseases and surgery, family history of breast cancer, medication allergies, and tendency to bleed.

Physical examination should focus on body mass index, vital signs, breast masses, inframammary intertrigo, degree of breast enlargement and ptosis, skin lesions, and nipple sensation and discharge.

Indications

Reduction mammaplasty is the surgical treatment of macromastia, a condition in which heavy and enlarged breasts may cause chest, neck, back and shoulder pain; inframammary intertrigo; difficulty performing deep inspirations; and the inability to fit into proper clothing.

Multiple breast reduction techniques exist. The Lejour technique consists of a vertical reduction based on a superior pedicle and includes breast liposuction and wide lower skin undermining. It can be performed in patients who require small or large reductions, even in patients who have gigantomastia (excess of breast tissue of more than 1000 g per side).9

Relevant Anatomy

The breast has an abundant blood supply that consists of perforators from the internal mammary artery (medially and inferiorly), branches from the thoracoacromial and thoracodorsal arteries (superiorly), and branches from the lateral thoracic artery and intercostal perforators (laterally). Also, multiple dermal and subdermal plexus are present, with a rich periareolar plexus.

The sensory nerve supply to the breast comes from lateral and anterior cutaneous branches of the second through sixth intercostal nerves. The nipple is supplied primarily by the fourth intercostal nerve, with contributions from the lateral third and fifth intercostal nerves and from the anterior second through fifth cutaneous nerves.

Contraindications

Contraindications for reduction mammaplasty include current or recent lactation, presence of unevaluated breast masses or suspicious microcalcifications, increased surgical risk from systemic illnesses, inability to understand the limitations of the procedure, and inability to accept the possible complications of the procedure.

More on Breast Reduction, Lejour

Overview: Breast Reduction, Lejour
Workup: Breast Reduction, Lejour
Treatment: Breast Reduction, Lejour
Follow-up: Breast Reduction, Lejour
Multimedia: Breast Reduction, Lejour
References

References

  1. Wise RJ. A preliminary report on a method of planning the mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. May 1956;17(5):367-75. [Medline].

  2. McKissock PK. Reduction mammaplasty with a vertical dermal flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. Mar 1972;49(3):245-52. [Medline].

  3. Lassus C. A technique for breast reduction. Int Surg. Jan 1970;53(1):69-72. [Medline].

  4. Lassus C. An "all-season" mammoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1986;10(1):9-15. [Medline].

  5. Lassus C. Breast reduction: evolution of a technique--a single vertical scar. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1987;11(2):107-12. [Medline].

  6. Weiner DL, Aiache AE, Silver L, Tittiranonda T. A single dermal pedicle for nipple transposition in subcutaneous mastectomy, reduction mammaplasty, or mastopexy. Plast Reconstr Surg. Feb 1973;51(2):115-20. [Medline].

  7. Lejour M. Vertical mammaplasty and liposuction of the breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. Jul 1994;94(1):100-14. [Medline].

  8. Lejour M. Vertical mammaplasty: early complications after 250 personal consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. Sep 1999;104(3):764-70. [Medline].

  9. Hofmann AK, Wuestner-Hofmann MC, Bassetto F, Scarpa C, Mazzoleni F. Breast reduction: modified "Lejour technique" in 500 large breasts. Plast Reconstr Surg. Oct 2007;120(5):1095-104; discussion 1105-7. [Medline].

  10. Kakagia D, Fragia K, Grekou A, Tsoutsos D. Reduction mammaplasty specimens and occult breast carcinomas. Eur J Surg Oncol. Feb 2005;31(1):19-21. [Medline].

  11. Pitanguy I, Torres E, Salgado F, Pires Viana GA. Breast pathology and reduction mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. Mar 2005;115(3):729-34; discussion 735. [Medline].

  12. de Groot RM, Kingma-Vegter F, Bakker XR. [Occult breast cancer discovered following breast reduction.]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2009;153:[Medline].

  13. Azzam C, De Mey A. Vertical scar mammaplasty in gigantomastia: retrospective study of 115 patients treated using the modified lejour technique. Aesthetic Plast Surg. May-Jun 2007;31(3):294-8. [Medline].

  14. Collis N, McGuiness CM, Batchelor AG. Drainage in breast reduction surgery: a prospective randomised intra-patient trail. Br J Plast Surg. Apr 2005;58(3):286-9. [Medline].

  15. Cunningham BL, Gear AJ, Kerrigan CL, Collins ED. Analysis of breast reduction complications derived from the BRAVO study. Plast Reconstr Surg. May 2005;115(6):1597-604. [Medline].

  16. Schumacher HH. Breast reduction and smoking. Ann Plast Surg. Feb 2005;54(2):117-9. [Medline].

  17. O'Blenes CA, Delbridge CL, Miller BJ, Pantelis A, Morris SF. Prospective study of outcomes after reduction mammaplasty: long-term follow-up. Plast Reconstr Surg. Feb 2006;117(2):351-8. [Medline].

  18. Miller BJ, Morris SF, Sigurdson LL, Bendor-Samuel RL, Brennan M, Davis G, et al. Prospective study of outcomes after reduction mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. Apr 2005;115(4):1025-31; discussion 1032-3. [Medline].

  19. Mello AA, Domingos NA, Miyazaki MC. Improvement in Quality of Life and Self-Esteem After Breast Reduction Surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg. Sep 19 2009;[Medline].

  20. Iwuagwu OC, Stanley PW, Platt AJ, Drew PJ, Walker LG. Effects of bilateral breast reduction on anxiety and depression: results of a prospective randomised trial. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2006;40(1):19-23. [Medline].

  21. Cherchel A, Azzam C, De Mey A. Breastfeeding after vertical reduction mammaplasty using a superior pedicle. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60(5):465-70. [Medline].

  22. Heine N, Eisenmann-Klein M, Prantl L. Gigantomasty: treatment with a short vertical scar. Aesthetic Plast Surg. Jan 2008;32(1):41-7. [Medline].

  23. Lista F, Ahmad J. Vertical scar reduction mammaplasty: a 15-year experience including a review of 250 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. Jun 2006;117(7):2152-65; discussion 2166-9. [Medline].

  24. Aufricht G. Mammaplasty for pendulous breasts; empiric and geometric planning. Plast Reconstr Surg (1946). Jan 1949;4(1):13-29. [Medline].

  25. Kreithen J, Caffee H, Rosenberg J, Chin G, Clayman M, Lawson M, et al. A comparison of the LeJour and Wise pattern methods of breast reduction. Ann Plast Surg. Mar 2005;54(3):236-41; discussion 241-2. [Medline].

Further Reading

Keywords

breast reduction lejour, Lejour reduction mammaplasty, vertical reduction mammaplasty, short scar breast reduction, Lejour vertical reduction technique, Lassus reduction, mammoplasty, mammaplasty, breast surgery, breast reduction pictures, breast reduction surgery, Lejour surgery, Lejour pictures, nipple-areola complex, inframammary fold, breast surgery scar, breast scar, surgical scar

Contributor Information and Disclosures

Author

Antonio Espinosa-de-los-Monteros, MD, Staff Physician, Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Alabama, Birmingham
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Jorge I de la Torre, MD, FACS, Professor of Surgery and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Residency Program Director, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham; Director, Center for Advanced Surgical Aesthetics
Jorge I de la Torre, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Association of Plastic Surgeons, American Burn Association, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery, American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery, American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Association for Academic Surgery, and Medical Association of the State of Alabama
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Medical Editor

Pankaj Tiwari, MD, Assistant Professor, Division of Plastic Surgery, Ohio State University
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Pharmacy Editor

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine
Disclosure: eMedicine Salary Employment

Managing Editor

Saleh M Shenaq, MD†, Former Director and Founder, The International Brachial Plexus Institute; Former Chief, Section of Plastic Surgery, Methodist Hospital, Houston
Saleh M Shenaq, MD† is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Association for Hand Surgery, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Association of Plastic Surgeons, American Burn Association, American College of Physician Executives, American College of Surgeons, American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine, American Medical Association, American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery, American Society for Surgery of the Hand, American Society of Gene Therapy, American Society of Law Medicine and Ethics, American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, American Trauma Society, Association for Academic Surgery, International College of Surgeons, Lipoplasty Society of North America, Plastic Surgery Research Council, Society for Neuroscience, Society of Surgical Oncology, Southern Medical Association, Texas Medical Association, and Texas Society of Plastic Surgeons
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

CME Editor

Nicolas (Nick) G Slenkovich, MD, Director, Colorado Plastic Surgery Center
Nicolas (Nick) G Slenkovich, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and Colorado Medical Society
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

James Neal Long, MD, Assistant Professor of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham and Kirklin Clinics
James Neal Long, MD is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Plastic Surgery Research Council, Sigma Xi, Southeastern Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons, and Southeastern Surgical Congress
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

 
 
HONcode

We subscribe to the
HONcode principles of the
Health On the Net Foundation

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright© 1994- by Medscape.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.