Breast volume assessment: comparing five different techniques

Abstract

Breast volume assessment is not routinely performed pre-operatively because as yet there is no accepted technique. There have been a variety of methods published, but this is the first study to compare these techniques. We compared volume measurements obtained from mammograms (previously compared to mastectomy specimens) with estimates of volume obtained from four other techniques: thermoplastic moulding, magnetic resonance imaging, Archimedes principle and anatomical measurements. We also assessed the acceptability of each method to the patient. Measurements were performed on 10 women, which produced results for 20 breasts. We were able to calculate regression lines between volume measurements obtained from mammography to the other four methods: (1) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 379+(0.75 MRI) [r=0.48], (2) Thermoplastic moulding, 132+(1.46 Thermoplastic moulding) [r=0.82], (3) Anatomical measurements, 168+(1.55 Anatomical measurements) [r=0.83]. (4) Archimedes principle, 359+(0.6 Archimedes principle) [r=0.61] all units in cc. The regression curves for the different techniques are variable and it is difficult to reliably compare results. A standard method of volume measurement should be used when comparing volumes before and after intervention or between individual patients, and it is unreliable to compare volume measurements using different methods. Calculating the breast volume from mammography has previously been compared to mastectomy samples and shown to be reasonably accurate. However we feel thermoplastic moulding shows promise and should be further investigated as it gives not only a volume assessment but a three-dimensional impression of the breast shape, which may be valuable in assessing cosmesis following breast-conserving-surgery.