Objective Standards and Subjective Preferences in Breast Aesthetics: A Scoping Review of the Ideal Breast

Clicks: 23
ID: 329933
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #59 of 129 articles by views in Aesthetic surgery journal

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 129 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Breast aesthetic ideals are shaped by anthropometric proportions, cultural norms, observer characteristics, and patient-specific expectations, yet the literature remains heterogeneous, with studies using variable measurements, image stimuli, and rating methods. This scoping review aimed to map the current evidence on objective morphometric standards and subjective aesthetic preferences in breast aesthetics and identify recurrent determinants of perceived breast attractiveness. A review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidance. MEDLINE and Embase were searched from inception to 28 October 2024. Studies were eligible if they evaluated breast aesthetic preferences, eye-tracking, ideal breast morphology, nipple-areola complex (NAC) characteristics, anthropometric measurements, or lay/clinician perceptions of breast aesthetics. Forty studies were included, comprising 39 cross-sectional studies and one prospective cohort study. Thirty-one studies (77.5%) primarily addressed general population images or measurements, while nine (22.5%) focused on a specific breast surgery context: breast augmentation (n = 4), breast reconstruction or breast-conserving therapy (n = 4), and reduction mammaplasty (n = 1). Seven overlapping evidence domains were identified: anthropometric, morphometric, eye-tracking, gender-related, cultural/geographic, lay perspective, and physician perspective studies. Recurrent determinants included breast-to-body proportionality, upper-to-lower pole ratio, lower-pole contour, projection, NAC position, areolar dimensions, and symmetry. No single breast morphology was consistently preferred across all populations. These findings support the use of recurring aesthetic domains as a practical framework for patient-centred consultation and outcome assessment, while highlighting the need for future research incorporating three-dimensional evaluation, culturally diverse populations, and validated patient-reported outcomes.
Reference Key
openalex_W7214505391 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Pegah Damavandi, Zhen Yu Wong, Ryan Faderani, Muholan Kanapathy, Afshin Mosahebi
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Aesthetic surgery journal
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/asj/sjag213
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjag213
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.