RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Breast augmentation is the most common cosmetic, surgical procedure (1). Implant insertion planes include subglandular or submuscular. Submuscular augmentation is often preferred in women with less soft tissue coverage; requiring pectoralis major dissection (2). However, loss of functional muscle fibres is undesirable in athletic women who actively train the pectoral region. OBJECTIVES: 1. Assessment of pectoralis function and strength after breast augmentation in athletic women. 2. Augmentation aesthetical satisfaction at rest and whilst training. METHODS: A retrospective survey was sent to female, fitness competitors with breast implants via social media over a six-month period. The survey assessed baseline demographics, pectoral strength (bench press, push-ups, pectoral fly), aesthetical satisfaction and issues during training including pain, rippling, firmness and implant movement. RESULTS: Eighty-one participants were surveyed. The mean age of augmentation was 29.7 (±8.41), and mean age of survey completion was 37.6 (±7.22) years. Submuscular augmentation was performed in 72.8% of participants. Recovery post-operative and time spent training was synonymous. The majority of participants' pectoral strength was unaffected or positively affected by breast augmentation. Assessment of post-operative performance and training issues of pain, rippling and firmness yielded no statistically significant difference between groups. Implant movement during pectoral exercises was 2.5 times more likely with submuscular augmentations, p= 0.038. Overall, the majority of the population were very satisfied or satisfied with their breast aesthetic at rest (92.6%) and during training (79.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Breast augmentation in athletic women has a high satisfaction rate with the majority maintaining or improving the strength of the pectoral region regardless of augmentation plane. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors https://www.springer.com/journal/00266 .