Patent Grant
7979996
The present invention relates in general to plastic surgery techniques, and in particular breast implant selector systems suitable for selecting breast implants prior to breast augmentation surgery.
Breast augmentation is one of the most common cosmetic surgical procedures performed in the United States and Europe. In 2006, almost 400,000 women in the United States chose breast implantation surgery to meet their personal goals. Breast augmentation is, for example, often chosen for enhancing figure proportions, for remedying breast droop or sag due to age, nursing, or weight loss, or for symmetry correction during breast reconstruction after cancer surgery. Studies have also shown that breast augmentation can lead to an improved quality of life. Whatever the reason chosen for breast augmentation, the choice of the appropriate breast implant is the first crucial step in the process of realizing the patient's goals.
Each woman who elects breast augmentation surgery not only has her own personal expectations, but also her own unique set of physical characteristics. Certainly the patient and the doctor must consider the patient's desired post-operative breast size and profile; however, the physical characteristics of the patient's breast, including tissue and skin characteristics, also must be carefully considered. In particular, the failure to clinically select a breast implant of the appropriate volume and shape can lead to disappointing aesthetic results, potentially uncorrectable deformities, or even the need for re-operation. Re-operation, which generally occurs with a frequency of ten to twenty percent (10-20%) after three (3) years, not only unnecessarily exposes the patient to additional surgery, but is also costly in terms of both the additional surgical procedure itself and the replacement implants.
Given the wide range of patient goals and differing physical characteristics, a relatively large range of breast implants have been developed and marketed. (Counting types, sizes, shapes, and so on, over two hundred [200] different implants are available in the United States alone.) While this wide range of choices advantageously allows patients and doctors the flexibility to choose the appropriate implant, the array of choices can also make the decision process more complicated, for both patient and doctor.
In other words, patients and their doctors need a better way of selecting the best possible breast implant from the relative large number of choices available in the marketplace. Any new breast implant selection techniques must not only address the aesthetic goals of the patient, but also the constraints imposed by the patient's physical characteristics. Such techniques should be accurate and minimize the risk of disappointing results and re-operation, yet still simply the selection process.
The principles of the present invention are embodied in breast implant selector systems that provide doctor and patient with the ability to easily and accurately select an appropriate breast implant in view of the patient's goals and physical characteristics. According to one particular exemplary embodiment, a breast implant selector system is disclosed that includes a breast width selector that allows for the input of breast width information, a breast tissue type selector that allows for the input of breast tissue type information, and an implant size selector allows for the input implant size information. A result indicator provides a result characterizing at least one suggested breast implant as a function of the input breast width, breast tissue type, and implant size information.
Embodiments of the present principles advantageously provide an easy to use system by which doctors and patients can select the best possible implant in view of the patient's goals and physical characteristics. In addition to being easy to use, these systems are accurate and minimize the risk of disappointing results and re-operation.
For a more complete understanding of the present invention, and the advantages thereof, reference is now made to the following descriptions taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:
The principles of the present invention and their advantages are best understood by referring to the illustrated embodiment depicted in
Breast width slide 101 of breast selector 100 bears a set of spaced apart marks or indicia that allow the doctor to input the measured breast width of the patient, in centimeters (cm), by aligning the corresponding breast width mark visible through breast width window 104 with fixed arrow 107 on the body of breast selector 100. In the illustrated embodiment, breast selector 100 has windows and slide markings on both sides, with the side visible in
Breast tissue slide 102 allows the doctor to align a mark associated with the patient's measured or observed breast tissue type with movable arrow 108, as set by breast width slide 101. In the illustrated embodiment, the five (5) different breast tissue type marks borne by breast tissue type slide 102 correspond to very tight/full, tight, normal, loose, and loose/fatty. (These five (5) breast tissue types are generally derived from skin stretch and nipple-to-fold measurements, along with subjective observations; in alternate embodiments, different breast tissue types (characterizations) may be used.) In turn, movable arrow 109, which is disposed on the edge of breast tissue type slide 102, moves a corresponding amount within breast size window 106.
Breast size window 106 and breast size slide 103 allow the patient and doctor to decide whether the implant will be the corresponding optimum choice from the set of available choices or will be smaller or larger than optimum. The recommended implant choices, which are provided on breast size slide 103, then appear in window 110. In the illustrated embodiment shown in
A more complete set of correlations between breast width, breast tissue type, breast implant size, and the Allergan 410 product family are provided in Tables 1-9. Generally, the information of Tables 1-9 is based on the substantial surgical experience of the inventors in using over one thousand (1000) Allergan 410 form stable implants, clinical observation, and heuristics, in view of the physical characteristics of the implants themselves.
Additionally, each designator number shown in window 110 of breast selector system 100 may be associated with a corresponding post-operative nipple-to-fold length value, for example in another color or font. Advantageously, the provided nipple-to-fold length value, will assist the surgeon in properly placing the incision during surgery.
Application of the principles of the present invention are not limited to the breast implant choices made available by any given manufacturer or any particular type or shape of implant. Moreover, the types, sizes, and shapes of the breast implants available in the marketplace may change as the manufacture develop new products. In particular, the inventive principles can be applied to many different types of implants, including silicone gel and saline, form-stable and non-form stable, anatomic shaped and round, textured or smooth, as well as of different heights and projections. For example, Tables 10-18 contain exemplary data characterizing the Allergan 10-15-20 smooth, round, gel implants and suitable for use in an alternate embodiment of selector 100.
Advantageously, breast implant selector 100 allows the doctor and patient to select an implant that best meets the patient's goals, while avoiding the problems associated with implants that are too large, too small, or of the wrong profile. Avoidance of breast implants that are too large not only reduces the risk of an unnatural appearance resulting from overfill, but equally importantly reduces the stress on the surrounding tissue and the risk of re-operation. On the other hand, avoiding underfill reduces the chance of “emptiness” in the upper breast, as well as a general lack of fullness. The ability to select between a combination of full and moderate height and full and moderate projection advantageously allows the doctor and patient to optimize the choice for women of differing heights and weights.
The body of both breast selector 100 and movable slides 101-103 are preferably constructed of cardboard or a similar rigid, lightweight material and the requisite information is printed in ink. In alternate embodiments, the body of breast selector 100 and/or slides 101-103 may be constructed of any one of a number of other materials, such as plastics or metals, and alternate techniques may be used for displaying the information, such as embossing or molding within the associated material.
An alternate embodiment of the principles of the present invention is shown in
Breast implant selector system 200 is based on four (4) movable slides (selectors) 201-204 and four (4) corresponding windows 205-208. The construction and operation of breast implant selector 200 are similar to those of breast implant selector 100, although breast selector system 200 applies an algorithm based on four (4) input criteria. In the preferred embodiment of breast implant selector system 200, the input criteria are measured breast width, measured skin type (stretch), measured or observed breast tissue type, and nipple-to-fold length, with the corresponding result being an optimal implant fill.
Breast width slide 201 allows the doctor to input the patient's breast width by aligning the mark representing the measured value appearing within breast width window 205 with fixed arrow 209. In the illustrated embodiment, breast width slide 201 allows for the input of breast widths from narrow (i.e. 10.5 cm) to very wide (i.e. 15.0 cm). When the appropriate breast width mark is aligned with arrow 209, movable arrow 210 on the edge of breast width slide 201 is set to a corresponding position within skin type window 206.
The patient's skin type is entered using skin type slide 202. In particular, the doctor aligns the corresponding skin type mark (arrow) (i.e. tight, average, loose, or very loose) on skin type slide 202 with movable arrow 210, as position by breast width slide 201. In turn, skin type slide 202 positions movable arrow 211 within breast tissue type window 207. The doctor then aligns the breast tissue type mark (arrow) on tissue type slide 203 with movable arrow 211, which in turn sets movable arrow 212 within fill (volume) window 208.
To determine the optimal fill, in centimeters squared (cc), the doctor aligns the appropriate nipple-to-fold arrow on fill slide 204 (i.e. normal or long) with arrow 212. The optimal fill (i.e. the fill that is the most natural and most proportionate) is then provided at fixed optimal fill arrow 213. The patient can request increased or decreased fill, although some trade-offs may be encountered. For example, with underfill, breast fullness and implant visibility decreases, while with overfill, the appearance becomes less natural, an upper bulge may occur, and the implant edges may become visible.
It should be recognized that while the illustrated embodiments of breast implant selectors 100 and 200 are linear slide rules, in alternate embodiments of the present inventive principles, circular slide rules may also be used. Furthermore, the information shown in the Tables, as well as the algorithms described above in conjunction with breast implant selectors 100 and 200, may also be utilized in electronic and software embodiments of these principles (e.g. hand-held electronic appliances and laptop computers).
Although the invention has been described with reference to specific embodiments, these descriptions are not meant to be construed in a limiting sense. Various modifications of the disclosed embodiments, as well as alternative embodiments of the invention, will become apparent to persons skilled in the art upon reference to the description of the invention. It should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the conception and the specific embodiment disclosed might be readily utilized as a basis for modifying or designing other structures for carrying out the same purposes of the present invention. It should also be realized by those skilled in the art that such equivalent constructions do not depart from the spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims.
It is therefore contemplated that the claims will cover any such modifications or embodiments that fall within the true scope of the invention.
The present application claims priority to U.S. parent application Ser. No. 12/217,984, filed Jul. 10, 2008 and claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 60/961,161, filed Jul. 19, 2007, the entire contents of which application is incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1681740 | Meyers | Aug 1928 | A |
| 2559501 | Graf | Jul 1951 | A |
| 4024856 | Kirianoff | May 1977 | A |
| 4189634 | LaBove et al. | Feb 1980 | A |
| 4219029 | Grossman et al. | Aug 1980 | A |
| 4338953 | Ward | Jul 1982 | A |
| 4772780 | Reed et al. | Sep 1988 | A |
| 6311403 | Macrini | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6467180 | Chan | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6981988 | Kinsley | Jan 2006 | B1 |
| 7685721 | Adams et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 20060136069 | Francalacci Franca | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20070203605 | Melton et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20080125675 | Lalonde | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20090112130 | Bengtson | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090137894 | Olson | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090198154 | Roshdieh et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090227904 | Mordaunt et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090287119 | Chapman | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20100234944 A1 | Sep 2010 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60961161 | Jul 2007 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 12217984 | Jul 2008 | US |
| Child | 12707837 | US |
