Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 5/2009

01-09-2009 | Original Article

Round Gel Breast Implants or Anatomic Gel Breast Implants: Which is the Best Choice?

Authors: Lázaro Cárdenas-Camarena, Joel Encinas-Brambila

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 5/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Since their introduction in 1993, anatomic implants have been popularized by numerous surgeons, but very little literature compares the precise indications, advantages, and disadvantages between round implants and anatomic implants.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed for all the patients who underwent breast implantation by the main author over a 15-year period. The number of implanted patients, the shape of the implants placed, the approach routes, and the placement plane were determined as well as the relationship between the shape of the implant and the approach route. The aesthetic results obtained were analyzed in detail based on the shape of the implant used.

Results

Over a 15-year period, 932 patients underwent surgery for breast implants. During the first 6 years, only round implants were used, and during the last 9 years, both anatomic and round implants were used. A total of 787 pairs of round implants and 145 pairs of anatomic implants were placed. The indications based on the postoperative aesthetic analysis suggest the use of implants according to their shape.

Conclusions

The use of anatomic implants is suggested for patients with significant differences in chest height and width measurements, for cases of significant mammary asymmetry, for patients with a small breast volume or a prominent thorax, and for breasts with a significant deficit of inferior mammary volume or significant shortening of the breast. The authors recommend round implants for patients with a superior pole deficit or moderate breast pseudoptosis, for patients who have a breast that will cover the implant, and for patients who present with a small asymmetry.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Baeke JL (2002) Breast deformity caused by anatomical or teardrop implant rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:2555–2564PubMedCrossRef Baeke JL (2002) Breast deformity caused by anatomical or teardrop implant rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:2555–2564PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Baxter RA (2004) Indications and practical applications for high-profile saline breast implants. Aesth Surg J 24:24–27CrossRef Baxter RA (2004) Indications and practical applications for high-profile saline breast implants. Aesth Surg J 24:24–27CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Friedman T, Davidovitch N, Scheflan M (2006) Comparative double-blind clinical study on round versus shaped cohesive gel implants. Aesth Surg J 26:530–536CrossRef Friedman T, Davidovitch N, Scheflan M (2006) Comparative double-blind clinical study on round versus shaped cohesive gel implants. Aesth Surg J 26:530–536CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Gampper TJ, Khoury H, Gottlieb W, Morgan RF (2007) Silicone gel implants in breast augmentation and reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 59:581–590PubMedCrossRef Gampper TJ, Khoury H, Gottlieb W, Morgan RF (2007) Silicone gel implants in breast augmentation and reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 59:581–590PubMedCrossRef
5.
6.
go back to reference Graf RM, Bernardes A, Rippel R, Araujo LR, Damasio RC, Auersvald A (2003) Subfascial breast implant: a new procedure. Plast Reconstr Surg 111:904–908PubMedCrossRef Graf RM, Bernardes A, Rippel R, Araujo LR, Damasio RC, Auersvald A (2003) Subfascial breast implant: a new procedure. Plast Reconstr Surg 111:904–908PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Hamas R (1999) The postoperative shape of round and teardrop saline-filled breast implants. Aesth Surg J 19:369–374CrossRef Hamas R (1999) The postoperative shape of round and teardrop saline-filled breast implants. Aesth Surg J 19:369–374CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Hidalgo DA (2000) Breast augmentation: choosing the optimal incision, implant, and pocket plane. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:2202–2216PubMedCrossRef Hidalgo DA (2000) Breast augmentation: choosing the optimal incision, implant, and pocket plane. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:2202–2216PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hsia HC, Thomson JG (2003) Differences in breast shape preferences between plastic surgeons and patients seeking breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 112:312–320PubMedCrossRef Hsia HC, Thomson JG (2003) Differences in breast shape preferences between plastic surgeons and patients seeking breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 112:312–320PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Niechajev I (2001) Mammary augmentation by cohesive silicone gel implants with anatomic shape: technical considerations. Aesth Plast Surg 25:397–403CrossRef Niechajev I (2001) Mammary augmentation by cohesive silicone gel implants with anatomic shape: technical considerations. Aesth Plast Surg 25:397–403CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Niechajev I, Jurell G, Lohjelm L (2007) Prospective study comparing two brands of cohesive gel breast implants with anatomic shape: 5-year follow-up evaluation. Aesth Plast Surg 31:697–710CrossRef Niechajev I, Jurell G, Lohjelm L (2007) Prospective study comparing two brands of cohesive gel breast implants with anatomic shape: 5-year follow-up evaluation. Aesth Plast Surg 31:697–710CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Nipshagen MD, Beekman WH, Esmé DL, de Becker J (2007) Anatomically shaped breast prosthesis in vivo: a change of dimension? Aesth Plast Surg 31:540–543CrossRef Nipshagen MD, Beekman WH, Esmé DL, de Becker J (2007) Anatomically shaped breast prosthesis in vivo: a change of dimension? Aesth Plast Surg 31:540–543CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Sadove R (2003) Cohesive gel naturally shaped breast implants. Aesth Surg J 23:63–66CrossRef Sadove R (2003) Cohesive gel naturally shaped breast implants. Aesth Surg J 23:63–66CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Spear SL, Bulan EJ, Venturi ML (2006) Breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 118(7 Suppl):188S–196SPubMedCrossRef Spear SL, Bulan EJ, Venturi ML (2006) Breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 118(7 Suppl):188S–196SPubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (1993) McGhan’s biodimensional augmentation system cohesive gel mammary implants. Instructional Video, 55’, McGhan Medical Corporation, Santa Barbara, CA, USA Tebbetts JB (1993) McGhan’s biodimensional augmentation system cohesive gel mammary implants. Instructional Video, 55’, McGhan Medical Corporation, Santa Barbara, CA, USA
16.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (1998) Use of anatomical breast implants: 10 essentials. Aesth Surg J 18:77–84CrossRef Tebbetts JB (1998) Use of anatomical breast implants: 10 essentials. Aesth Surg J 18:77–84CrossRef
17.
18.
go back to reference Van Zele D, Heymans O (2004) Breast implants: a review. Acta Chir Belg 104:158–165PubMed Van Zele D, Heymans O (2004) Breast implants: a review. Acta Chir Belg 104:158–165PubMed
Metadata
Title
Round Gel Breast Implants or Anatomic Gel Breast Implants: Which is the Best Choice?
Authors
Lázaro Cárdenas-Camarena
Joel Encinas-Brambila
Publication date
01-09-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 5/2009
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-009-9370-8

Other articles of this Issue 5/2009

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 5/2009 Go to the issue