Advertisement

Can Montgomery tubercles impact aesthetic 3D nipple-areolar complex tattooing? An anatomical, quantitative analysis of breast cancer patients

Published:November 08, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.11.005

      Highlights

      • Reconstruction of the NAC is integral to breast reconstruction, increasing multiple quality-of-life domains.
      • A variety of techniques may be employed to reconstruct the NAC, including local grafts, flaps, and 3D NAC tattooing.
      • Despite the importance of NAC reconstruction, scant studies have examined the influence of patient characteristics on NACs.
      • Our study suggests that NAC projections, termed Montgomery tubercles, are influenced by menopausal status.
      • 3D NAC tattoo artists may consider menopausal status when deciding quantity of Montgomery tubercles for an aesthetic tattoo.

      Abstract

      Purpose

      We aimed to establish a relationship between the amount of Montgomery tubercles (MTs) per nipple-areolar complex (NAC) given patient characteristics such as age, BMI, menopausal status, race/ethnicity, and NAC size to better inform current 3D NAC tattooing practices.

      Methods

      Preoperative photographs of patients pursuing breast reconstruction after mastectomy in 2010 through 2018 were reviewed. The number of MTs on each native NAC was quantified. The impact of patient factors on the quantity of MTs was evaluated via Pearson correlation and bivariate analyses.

      Results

      Two hundred and eleven patients (399 breasts) were reviewed. On average, patients had 5.0 ± 5.2 MTs (range, 0–25 MTs). Number of MTs did not correlate with patient age, BMI, or NAC size. Premenopausal females were more likely than postmenopausal females to have a greater number of MTs per breast (p-value = 0.0183).

      Conclusions

      Postmastectomy patients desiring a more “youthful” NAC may consider additional MTs when pursuing 3D NAC tattooing.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to The American Journal of Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • DeSantis C.E.
        • Ma J.
        • Gaudet M.M.
        • et al.
        Breast cancer statistics.
        CA A Cancer J Clin. 2019; 69 (2019 Nov) (Epub 2019 Oct 2. PMID: 31577379): 438-451https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21583
        • Miller A.M.
        • Steiner C.A.
        • Barrett M.L.
        • et al.
        Breast reconstruction surgery for mastectomy in hospital inpatient and ambulatory settings, 2009–2014: statistical brief #228. 2017 oct.
        in: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Briefs. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), Rockville (MD)2006 Feb ([Internet]) (Available from:)
        • Gougoutas A.J.
        • Said H.K.
        • Um G.
        • Chapin A.
        • Mathes D.W.
        Nipple-areola complex reconstruction.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Mar; 141 (PMID: 29481412): 404e-416ehttps://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004166
        • Hammond J.B.
        • Teven C.M.
        • Bernard R.W.
        • et al.
        3D nipple–areolar tattoo: it's technique, outcomes, and utilization.
        Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2021 Apr; 45: 453-458
        • Veiga D.F.
        • Veiga-Filho J.
        • Ribeiro L.M.
        • et al.
        Quality-of-life and self-esteem outcomes after oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Mar; 125 (Retraction in: J Cancer Res Ther. 2019 Jan-Mar;15(1):264. PMID: 20195109): 811-817https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ccdac5
        • DiCenso D.
        • Fischer-Cartlidge E.
        Nipple-areola tattoos: making the right referral.
        Oncol Nurs Forum. 2015 Nov; 42 (PMID: 26488844): E376-E381https://doi.org/10.1188/15.ONF.E376-E381
        • Goh S.C.
        • Martin N.A.
        • Pandya A.N.
        • Cutress R.I.
        Patient satisfaction following nipple-areolar complex reconstruction and tattooing.
        J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg. 2011 Mar; 64 (Epub 2010 Jun 8. PMID: 20570584): 360-363https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2010.05.010
        • Halvorson E.G.
        • Cormican M.
        • West M.E.
        • Myers V.
        Three-dimensional nipple-areola tattooing: a new technique with superior results.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014; 133: 1073-1075
      1. Montgomery WF. An exposition of the signs and symptoms of pregnancy, the period of human gestation, and the signs of delivery. Med Chir Rev. 1838 Jan 1;28(55):90-106. PMID: 29918386; PMCID: PMC5093539.

        • Montagna W.
        • Yun J.S.
        The glands of Montgomery.
        Br J Dermatol. 1972 Feb; 86 (PMID: 4552803): 126-133https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1972.tb16074.x
        • Smith Jr., D.M.
        • Peters T.G.
        • Donegan W.L.
        Montgomery's areolar tubercle. A light microscopic study.
        Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1982 Feb; 106 (PMID: 6277270): 60-63
        • Doucet S.
        • Soussignan R.
        • Sagot P.
        • Schaal B.
        The secretion of areolar (Montgomery's) glands from lactating women elicits selective, unconditional responses in neonates.
        PLoS One. 2009 Oct 23; 4 (PMID: 19851461; PMCID: PMC2761488)e7579https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007579
      2. Extragonadal estrogen production.
        N Engl J Med. 1967 Jan 5; 276 (PMID: 4288850): 57-58https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM196701052760113
        • Alex A.
        • Bhandary E.
        • McGuire K.P.
        Anatomy and physiology of the breast during pregnancy and lactation.
        Adv Exp Med Biol. 2020; 1252 (PMID: 32816256): 3-7https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41596-9_1
        • Egan K.G.
        • Cullom M.
        • Nazir N.
        • Butterworth J.A.
        Patient satisfaction increases with nipple reconstruction following autologous breast reconstruction.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021 Aug 1; 148 (PMID: 34133405): 177e-184ehttps://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000008180
        • Wellisch D.K.
        • Schain W.S.
        • Noone R.B.
        • Little 3rd, J.W.
        The psychological contribution of nipple addition in breast reconstruction.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987 Nov; 80 (PMID: 3671562): 699-704https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-198711000-00007
        • Jabor M.A.
        • Shayani P.
        • Collins Jr., D.R.
        • Karas T.
        • Cohen B.E.
        Nipple-areola reconstruction: satisfaction and clinical determinants.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002 Aug; 110 (PMID: 12142660) (discussion 464-5): 457-463https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200208000-00013
        • Uhlmann N.R.
        • Martins M.M.
        • Piato S.
        3D areola dermopigmentation (nipple-areola complex).
        Breast J. 2019 Nov; 25 (Epub 2019 Jul 18. PMID: 31321852): 1214-1221https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.13427
        • Sivathasan N.
        • Singh K.
        A patient's quest for Montgomery glands in a reconstructed breast.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012 Feb; 129 (PMID: 22286480): 388e-389ehttps://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e31823af06c
        • Gamboa-Bobadilla G.M.
        Nipple reconstruction: the top hat technique.
        Ann Plast Surg. 2005 Mar; 54 (PMID: 15725823): 243-246
        • Eng J.S.
        Bell flap nipple reconstruction--a new wrinkle.
        Ann Plast Surg. 1996 May; 36 (PMID: 8743658): 485-488https://doi.org/10.1097/00000637-199605000-00009
        • Cerdeña J.P.
        • Plaisime M.V.
        • Tsai J.
        From race-based to race-conscious medicine: how anti-racist uprisings call us to act.
        Lancet. 2020 Oct 10; 396 (PMID: 33038972; PMCID: PMC7544456): 1125-1128https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32076-6