Role of Macrotextured Shaped Extra Full Projection Cohesive Gel Implants in Primary Aesthetic Breast Augmentation. (11th November 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Montemurro, Paolo; Cheema, Mubashir; Hedén, Per; Ferri, Massimiliano; Quattrini Li, Alessandro; Avvedimento, Stefano
• Is Part Of: Aesthetic surgery journal. Volume 37:Number 4(2017)
• Page Start: 408
• Page End: 418
• Publication Date: 2016-11-11
• Subjects: Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; 617.95
• DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjw199
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1090-820X

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Extra full projection implants are used in a select group of aesthetic breast surgery patients. Their use is selective enough that they have not been included in long term manufacturer studies and the indications for their use have attracted much debate. Only a handful of studies have reported the outcomes from implantation of these devices. Objectives: We review our experience of using extra full projection anatomically shaped macrotextured silicone gel implants discussing our rationale, indications, and results. Methods: All patients undergoing primary aesthetic breast surgery with extra full projection anatomical implants by the first author (P.M.) over a seven-year period (January 2009 to December 2015) were included. Results: Three hundred and ten female patients had 620 macrotextured extra full projection anatomically shaped cohesive silicone gel breast implants of mean volume 338 cc (range, 195-615 cc) placed over the seven-year period. All of them had at least a 6-months follow up. There were 39 complications (12.6%) at an average follow up of 12.3 months, including implant malposition/rotation (5.4%), capsular contracture (2.6%), and bottoming out (1.6%). A total of 41 patients (13.2%) were reoperated, of which 30 (9.7%) were due to a complication and 11 (3.5%) because of patient choice. Most of the complications were in the initial part of the case series. Conclusions: The outcomes following the use of extra full projection implants in a carefully selected group of patients are comparable in the short term to those reported for other shaped implants and complications appear to decrease with experience. Level of Evidence: 4: