Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 1/2011

01-02-2011 | Letter to the Editor

Back-to-Front Flipping of Implants Following Augmentation Mammoplasty and the Role of Physical Characteristics in a Round Cohesive Gel Silicone Breast Implant: Retrospective Analysis of 3458 Breast Implants by a Single Surgeon

Author: Umar Daraz Khan

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 1/2011

Login to get access

Excerpt

Augmentation mammoplasty is one of the most commonly performed procedures today by plastic surgeons. Results and outcomes of the procedure depend on appropriate prosthesis selection, pocket selection, and pocket dissection. Available pockets are subglandular [1], partial submuscular [2], dual plane [3], subfascial plane [4], and muscle-splitting biplane [5]. On the other hand, implant selection is not easy due to the multitude of available implant shapes, sizes, texturing, gel-fill ratios, and profiles. The choice may run into thousands when all of the available products of various manufacturers are added. Fewer available pockets and familiarity with them makes it easier to select a pocket; however, the battle to select and find an ideal implant is far from over. Comparative parity between the breast width and the implant dimension is of paramount importance regardless of the physical characteristics of an implant or pocket. However, the fine details of the result are in the interaction between breast envelopes, physical characteristics of the implant, and a carefully dissected pocket. The two most commonly used implant fillers are saline and silicone. These implants may have a smooth, microtextured, or textured surface and are available in an anatomical shape, with low, moderate, high, and extra high profiles with different gel-fill ratios. As opposed to the subpectoral plane used for saline implants, silicone implants can be placed in either subglandular or subpectoral pockets, depending on the soft tissue characteristics of the breast envelope. The criterion of envelope adequacy usually is measured by a pinch test [3], although the long-term reliability of the pinch test needs to be carefully assessed [6]. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference Cronin TD, Gerow RM (1964) Augmentation mammoplasty: new “natural feel” prosthesis. In: translation of the third international congress of the plastic surgery, Excerpta Medica International Congress Series, No. 66. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam, pp 41-49 Cronin TD, Gerow RM (1964) Augmentation mammoplasty: new “natural feel” prosthesis. In: translation of the third international congress of the plastic surgery, Excerpta Medica International Congress Series, No. 66. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam, pp 41-49
2.
go back to reference Regnault P (1976) Breast ptosis: definition and treatment. Clin Plast Surg 91:657–662 Regnault P (1976) Breast ptosis: definition and treatment. Clin Plast Surg 91:657–662
3.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (2001) Dual-plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant soft tissue relationship in a wide range of breast types. Plast Reconstr Surg 107:1255–1272CrossRefPubMed Tebbetts JB (2001) Dual-plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant soft tissue relationship in a wide range of breast types. Plast Reconstr Surg 107:1255–1272CrossRefPubMed
4.
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 111:904–908CrossRefPubMed Graf RM, Bernardes A, Rippel R, Araujo LR, Damasio RC, Auersvald A (2003) Subfascial breast implant: a new procedure. Plast Reconstr Surg 111:904–908CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Khan UD (2007) Muscle splitting biplane breast augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 31:353–358 Khan UD (2007) Muscle splitting biplane breast augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 31:353–358
6.
go back to reference Khan UD (2009) Selection of breast pocket using pinch test in augmentation mammoplasty: can it be relied on in the long term? Aesthet Plast Surg 33:780–781CrossRef Khan UD (2009) Selection of breast pocket using pinch test in augmentation mammoplasty: can it be relied on in the long term? Aesthet Plast Surg 33:780–781CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Khan UD (2010) Combining muscle splitting biplane with multilayer capsulorrhaphy for the correction of bottoming down following subglandular augmentation. Eur J Plast Surg. doi:10.1007/s00238-010-0414-8 Khan UD (2010) Combining muscle splitting biplane with multilayer capsulorrhaphy for the correction of bottoming down following subglandular augmentation. Eur J Plast Surg. doi:10.​1007/​s00238-010-0414-8
8.
go back to reference Baeke JL (2002) Breast deformity caused by anatomical or tear-drop implant rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:2555–2564CrossRefPubMed Baeke JL (2002) Breast deformity caused by anatomical or tear-drop implant rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:2555–2564CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Ashley FL (1970) A new type of breast prosthesis: preliminary report. Plast Reconstr Surg 45:421–424CrossRefPubMed Ashley FL (1970) A new type of breast prosthesis: preliminary report. Plast Reconstr Surg 45:421–424CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Hester TR Jr, Nahai F, Bostwick J, Cukic J (1988) A 5-year experience with polyurethane covered mammary prosthesis for treatment of capsular contracture, primary augmentation mammoplasty and breast reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 15:569–585PubMed Hester TR Jr, Nahai F, Bostwick J, Cukic J (1988) A 5-year experience with polyurethane covered mammary prosthesis for treatment of capsular contracture, primary augmentation mammoplasty and breast reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 15:569–585PubMed
11.
go back to reference Danino AM, Basmacioglu P, Saito S, Rocher F, Blanchet-Bardon C, Revol M, Servant JM (2001) Comparison of the capsular response to the Biocell RTV and Mentor 1600 Siltex breast implant surface texturing: a scanning electron microscopy study. Plast Reconstr Surg 108:2047–2052CrossRefPubMed Danino AM, Basmacioglu P, Saito S, Rocher F, Blanchet-Bardon C, Revol M, Servant JM (2001) Comparison of the capsular response to the Biocell RTV and Mentor 1600 Siltex breast implant surface texturing: a scanning electron microscopy study. Plast Reconstr Surg 108:2047–2052CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Raso DS, Grene WB, Metcalf JS (1994) Synovial metaplasia of periprosthetic breast capsule. Arch Pathol Lab Med 118:249–251PubMed Raso DS, Grene WB, Metcalf JS (1994) Synovial metaplasia of periprosthetic breast capsule. Arch Pathol Lab Med 118:249–251PubMed
13.
go back to reference Del Rosario AD, Bui HX, Petrocine S, Sheehan C, Pastore J, Singh J, Ross JS (1995) True synovial metaplasia of breast implant capsules: a light and electron microscopic study. Ultrastruct Pathol 19:83–93CrossRefPubMed Del Rosario AD, Bui HX, Petrocine S, Sheehan C, Pastore J, Singh J, Ross JS (1995) True synovial metaplasia of breast implant capsules: a light and electron microscopic study. Ultrastruct Pathol 19:83–93CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Khan UD (2010) Breast augmentation, antibiotic prophylaxis and infection: comparative analysis of 1628 primary augmentation mammoplasties to assess the role and efficacy of length of antibiotic prophylaxis. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:42–47CrossRef Khan UD (2010) Breast augmentation, antibiotic prophylaxis and infection: comparative analysis of 1628 primary augmentation mammoplasties to assess the role and efficacy of length of antibiotic prophylaxis. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:42–47CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Psillakis JM, Facchina PH, Kharmandayan P, Trillo L, Canzi WC, Aguiar HR (2010) Review of 1,447 breast augmentation patients using PERTHESE silicone implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:11–15CrossRef Psillakis JM, Facchina PH, Kharmandayan P, Trillo L, Canzi WC, Aguiar HR (2010) Review of 1,447 breast augmentation patients using PERTHESE silicone implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 34:11–15CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Back-to-Front Flipping of Implants Following Augmentation Mammoplasty and the Role of Physical Characteristics in a Round Cohesive Gel Silicone Breast Implant: Retrospective Analysis of 3458 Breast Implants by a Single Surgeon
Author
Umar Daraz Khan
Publication date
01-02-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 1/2011
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-010-9557-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 1/2011 Go to the issue

Editorial

Editorial