Endoscopic Transaxillary Breast Augmentation: A Case Series of 1389 Patients

Clicks: 3
ID: 338041
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 #125 of 125 articles by views in Aesthetic Surgery Journal Open Forum

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 125 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 Background Transaxillary breast augmentation offers an advantageous hidden scar compared with other options for implant placement. While first described as a blunt and blind approach, endoscopic technique further refined this procedure to offer surgeons complete control and visualization of dissection. Despite this, breast augmentation is done far more commonly as was initially described over 60 years ago with incisions on the breast that can result in visible scarring. Objectives The purpose of this study was to report surgical outcomes on the largest published case series to date of endoscopic transaxillary breast augmentations. We describe the refinement of surgical technique and statistical analysis of patient outcomes. Methods This study included all patients with breast hypoplasia who chose endoscopic transaxillary breast augmentation from 2006 to 2022 by a single surgeon. All patients were followed for a minimum of 3 months post procedure. Results Overall complication rate in our cohort of 1389 patients was 6.66%. Malposition of implants was the most common complication at 3.13%. Contracture rate was 1.73%. There was a significant increase noted in hematoma rate in subfascial placement (2.11%) compared to submuscular (0.35%) placements (1.76% increase, p-value=0.0000432) and a decrease in implant malposition in the subfascial group (0.42%) compared to the submuscular (3.71%) group (3.29% decrease, p-value = 0.000480). Implant size ranged from 180 to 800 cc and were placed in the subfascial or submuscular plane. While various implant types were used, the vast majority were smooth round silicone implants. Conclusions This study demonstrates that transaxillary endoscopic breast augmentation is asafe procedure with a low risk of complications. The advantages of a hidden scar should be a consideration for surgeons to adopt this technique.
Reference Key
openalex_W7224830261 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Shim Ching, Yaeesh Sardiwalla, Carlos Areia
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Aesthetic Surgery Journal Open Forum
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/asjof/ojag218
URL
https://academic.oup.com/asjopenforum/advance-article-pdf/doi/10.1093/asjof/ojag218/72612119/ojag218.pdf
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.