The Moufarrege Total Submuscular Augmentation or How to Preserve Nipple Erogenous Sensation in Breast Augmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast augmentation is currently one of the most common plastic surgery procedures performed worldwide. However, patients who underwent this procedure always complain of postoperative sensory changes at the nipple areolar complex. The nipple nervous system includes a tactile sensation system and an erogenous sensation system, the latter being less described and commonly overlooked by plastic surgeons performing breast augmentations. The erogenous sensation is supplied by the IVth, Vth and VIth intercostal nerves who run laterally on the surface along the muscular aponeurosis. Both subpectoral (dual plane) breast augmentations and sub-glandular breast augmentations present a real and constant risk of damage to these nerves, resulting in a permanent loss of nipple erogenous sensation. In the Total Submuscular Breast Augmentation approach, the implant is inserted behind the four muscles: the external oblique, the serratus anterior, the pectoralis minor and the pectoralis major. This approach will preserve the three intercostal nerves responsible for the erogenous sensation of the nipple. In this article we describe the surgical technique and the advantages of the total submuscular breast augmentation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".