Concepts in Navel Aesthetic: A Comprehensive Surface Anatomy Analysis and Its Clinical Translation
In literature, few studies are available on navel surface anatomy and there is no standardisation regarding its proper placement in abdominoplasty.
The design of this observational study comprised three parts:
A) Analysis of navel surface anatomy of bikini 2013 pictures taken from six worldwide top on-line gossip magazine. Pictures were selected according to quality imaging criteria. By using the ruler tool and pixel measurements in Adobe Photoshop¨ CS7, four proportions were analyzed.(figure1)
B) Analysis of navel shapes in the same pictures and vertical to horizontal umbilical (V:H) ratio of each navel.(figure2)
C) On-line survey via facebook.com made of seven multiple choice questions (MCQs), involving 1682 invited people asked to choose the most and the less beautiful navel shape (figure2) and the ideal navel position on two photographs of the same celebrity/model, of which one was the original photograph and the other one had been edited with the umbilicus position relocated according to the ideal XU:UC ratio of 1.618.(figure3)
Statistics of 81 top bikini 2013 navels are provided in table 1. The most appreciated navel shapes was shape B (82%) and the less appreciated ones were F (47%) and E (29%). In all the five MCQs, comparing navel position on the same body, the majority of partecipants choose the one with the navel relocated according to the golden ratio.
This study on 81 worldwide recognized top bikini 2013 reveals that the most attractive navel position is located at XU:UC golden ratio, being always in between the apex of iliac crest and ASISs. Bony landmarks seems to be not reliable as references for proper navel positioning (unacceptable wide data spread). According to these observations, since three months we are using the Fibonacci caliper intraoperatively to precisely locate the navel in abdominoplasty and DIEP flap breast reconstruction.(figure 4)
