The choice between silicone breast implants or saline breast implants is a somewhat subjective question. It really depends on your specific anatomy needs and finances. Both silicone and saline implants are excellent and for most people that have adequate coverage over the breast implant, meaning they have a little bit of breast tissue or a little bit of fat left that is going to cover the implant, saline breast implants work fine. In some instances, where the patient is very thin, it might be better to use the silicone gel breast implant because there are parts of the implant, about a third to one half that are not covered by the muscle and if you don’t have enough coverage over the implant, you will see some rippling and some wrinkling of the implant. This tends to happen especially when you lean over or lean forward. Therefore, in those cases, silicone gel implants are better. In terms of how they look, they are both great breast implants and they look very similar. The silicone implants are a little bit more expensive, so if the finances are a big issue than saline implants generally work very well and can give you the desired results, but again it is more of a personal preference.
As with any sort of surgery there are always risks involved. The two most common risks for breast implant surgery are bleeding and infection. In general, the risk of bleeding is very low, and if it does happen, it will typically happen within the first 24 hours. Infection on the other hand, can take up to one to two weeks to before it will show itself. However, we take every possible precaution such as; using sterile equipment, sterile gowns, gloves, masks and many other safety precautions. The risk of infection is typically anywhere from two to three percent. So yes, there are risks and they can happen but they are very rare. One other risk that needs to be mentioned is the risk of using anesthesia. So yes, it can happen, but it’s exceedingly rare.
It is also possible for implants to rupture and leak. If saline implants rupture, the saline will be safely absorbed by the body. A silicone leak may stay inside the implant shell or leak outside of the shell. When a saline implant ruptures, it will deflate. But silicone breast implants may cause no obvious symptoms when they rupture. This is called silent rupture.
Platinum is a catalyst used in the making of silicone implant polymer shells and other silicone devices used in medicine. The literature indicates that small amounts of platinum leaches (leaks) from these implants and is present in the surrounding tissue. The FDA reviewed the available studies from the medical literature on platinum and breast implants in 2002 and concluded there was little evidence suggesting toxicity from platinum in implant patients. The FDA revisited this study and additional literature several years later, reaffirming prior conclusions that platinum catalysts used in implants is likely not ionized and therefore would not represent a risk to women.
Post-operative patient surveys about mental health and quality-of-life, reported improved physical health, physical appearance, social life, self-confidence, self-esteem, and satisfactory sexual functioning. Furthermore, the women reported long-term satisfaction with their breast implant outcomes; some despite having suffered medical complications that required surgical revision, either corrective or aesthetic. Likewise, in Denmark, 8 per cent of breast augmentation patients had a pre-operative history of psychiatric hospitalization.
Placing the breast implants on top of the muscle, which has been the traditional procedure, can result in a slightly higher risk of contraction. This issue is a cosmetic problem, rather than a medical or health issue. Gel/Silicone implants have been placed both above and below the muscle without a significant difference in the rates of having contraction.
When compared to the results achieved with a silicone-gel breast implant, the saline implant can yield acceptable results, of increased breast-size, smoother hemisphere-contour, and realistic texture; yet, it is likelier to cause cosmetic problems, such as the rippling and the wrinkling of the breast-envelope skin, accelerated lower breast pole stretch, and technical problems, such as the presence of the implant being noticeable to the eye and to the touch. The occurrence of such cosmetic problems is likelier in the case of the woman with very little breast tissue, and in the case of the woman who requires post-mastectomy breast reconstruction; thus, the silicone-gel implant is the technically superior prosthetic device for breast augmentation, and for breast reconstruction. In the case of the woman with much breast tissue, for whom sub-muscular emplacement is the recommended surgical approach, saline breast implants can produce an aesthetic result much like that afforded by silicone breast implants, albeit with greater implant palpability.
Your surgeon can take photos of your breasts and detail your physical symptoms caused by enlarged breasts in a letter. Get in touch with your health insurer early and make sure you understand exactly what they will pay for. For example, will insurance cover such things as lab costs or anesthesiologist fees? Asking in advance will help prevent surprise costs after the surgery.
In the 1980s, the models of the Third and of the Fourth generations of breast implant devices were sequential advances in manufacturing technology, such as elastomer-coated shells that decreased gel-bleed (filler leakage), and a thicker (increased-cohesion) filler gel. Sociologically, the manufacturers of prosthetic breasts then designed and made anatomic models (natural breast) and shaped models (round, tapered) that realistically corresponded with the breast- and body- types of women. The tapered models of breast implant have a uniformly textured surface, which reduces the rotation of the prosthesis within the implant pocket; the round models of breast implant are available in smooth-surface- and textured-surface- types.
Do not receive BOTOX® Cosmetic if you: are allergic to any of the ingredients in BOTOX® Cosmetic (see Medication Guide for ingredients); had an allergic reaction to any other botulinum toxin product such as Myobloc® (rimabotulinumtoxinB), Dysport® (abobotulinumtoxinA), or Xeomin® (incobotulinumtoxinA); have a skin infection at the planned injection site.
In the mid-twentieth century, Morton I. Berson, in 1945, and Jacques Maliniac, in 1950, each performed flap-based breast augmentations by rotating the patient's chest wall tissue into the breast to increase its volume. Furthermore, throughout the 1950s and the 1960s, plastic surgeons used synthetic fillers—including silicone injections received by some 50,000 women, from which developed silicone granulomas and breast hardening that required treatment by mastectomy. In 1961, the American plastic surgeons Thomas Cronin and Frank Gerow, and the Dow Corning Corporation, developed the first silicone breast prosthesis, filled with silicone gel; in due course, the first augmentation mammoplasty was performed in 1962 using the Cronin–Gerow Implant, prosthesis model 1963. In 1964, the French company Laboratoires Arion developed and manufactured the saline breast implant, filled with saline solution, and then introduced for use as a medical device in 1964.
the first technological developments were a thinner-gauge device-shell, and a filler gel of low-cohesion silicone, which improved the functionality and the verisimilitude (size, appearance, and texture) of the silicone-gel breast implant. Yet, in clinical practice, second-generation breast implants proved fragile, and suffered greater incidences of shell rupture, and of filler leakage ("silicone-gel bleed") through the intact device shell. The consequent, increased incidence-rates of medical complications (e.g. capsular contracture) precipitated faulty-product, class action-lawsuits, by the U.S. government, against the Dow Corning Corporation, and other manufacturers of breast prostheses.
In surgical practice, for the reconstruction of a breast, the tissue expander device is a temporary breast prosthesis used to form and establish an implant pocket for the future permanent breast implant. For the correction of male breast defects and deformities, the pectoral implant is the breast prosthesis used for the reconstruction and the aesthetic repair of a man's chest wall (see: gynecomastia and mastopexy).
In recent years, medical tourism, or going outside the U.S. for a surgery or procedure, has become more popular. Patients go to other countries to have rhinoplasty and other surgery performed at a lower cost. While several other countries, such as South Korea, Columbia, and Italy, may have surgeons willing to perform rhinoplasty at a low cost, the quality and safety standards may not be as closely regulated as they are in the U.S.
In 2006, for the Inamed Corporation and for the Mentor Corporation, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration lifted its restrictions against using silicone-gel breast implants for breast reconstruction and for augmentation mammoplasty. Yet, the approval was conditional upon accepting FDA monitoring, the completion of 10-year-mark studies of the women who already had the breast implants, and the completion of a second, 10-year-mark study of the safety of the breast implants in 40,000 other women. The FDA warned the public that breast implants do carry medical risks, and recommended that women who undergo breast augmentation should periodically undergo MRI examinations to screen for signs of either shell rupture or of filler leakage, or both conditions; and ordered that breast surgery patients be provided with detailed, informational brochures explaining the medical risks of using silicone-gel breast implants.
They are essentially very similar procedures. The difference is in the amount of breast tissue removed. In a breast lift procedure, the nipple areolar complex is lift to a better position on the breast, and some breast tissue is removed and the breast envelope tightened. In a breast reduction, the nipple areolar complex is also lifted, but much more breast tissue is removed.
Because a breast implant is a Class III medical device of limited product-life, the principal rupture-rate factors are its age and design; Nonetheless, a breast implant device can retain its mechanical integrity for decades in a woman's body. When a saline breast implant ruptures, leaks, and empties, it quickly deflates, and thus can be readily explanted (surgically removed). The follow-up report, Natrelle Saline-filled Breast Implants: a Prospective 10-year Study (2009) indicated rupture-deflation rates of 3–5 per cent at 3-years post-implantation, and 7–10 per cent rupture-deflation rates at 10-years post-implantation.
Subglandular: the breast implant is emplaced to the retromammary space, between the breast tissue (the mammary gland) and the pectoralis major muscle (major muscle of the chest), which most approximates the plane of normal breast tissue, and affords the most aesthetic results. Yet, in women with thin pectoral soft-tissue, the subglandular position is likelier to show the ripples and wrinkles of the underlying implant. Moreover, the capsular contracture incidence rate is slightly greater with subglandular implantation.
The study Safety and Effectiveness of Mentor’s MemoryGel Implants at 6 Years (2009), which was a branch study of the U.S. FDA's core clinical trials for primary breast augmentation surgery patients, reported low device-rupture rates of 1.1 per cent at 6-years post-implantation. The first series of MRI evaluations of the silicone breast implants with thick filler-gel reported a device-rupture rate of 1 percent, or less, at the median 6-year device-age. Statistically, the manual examination (palpation) of the woman is inadequate for accurately evaluating if a breast implant has ruptured. The study, The Diagnosis of Silicone Breast implant Rupture: Clinical Findings Compared with Findings at Magnetic Resonance Imaging (2005), reported that, in asymptomatic patients, only 30 per cent of the ruptured breast implants are accurately palpated and detected by an experienced plastic surgeon, whereas MRI examinations accurately detected 86 per cent of breast implant ruptures. Therefore, the U.S. FDA recommended scheduled MRI examinations, as silent-rupture screenings, beginning at the 3-year-mark post-implantation, and then every two years, thereafter. Nonetheless, beyond the U.S., the medical establishments of other nations have not endorsed routine MRI screening, and, in its stead, proposed that such a radiologic examination be reserved for two purposes: (i) for the woman with a suspected breast implant rupture; and (ii) for the confirmation of mammographic and ultrasonic studies that indicate the presence of a ruptured breast implant.