The Postoperative Shape of Round and Teardrop Saline-filled Breast Implants

Abstract

Background: Teardrop saline-filled breast implants have been portrayed as having a more natural shape and appearance than round saline-filled implants. However, there are no data in the literature supporting this assertion. Objective: This study was conducted to evaluate the postoperative shape of round implants and compare it with the shape of teardrop implants. Methods: With patients upright and with nothing touching the breasts, lateral radiographs were taken to document the in vivo shape of breast implants. A total of 14 round saline-filled implants in 7 breast augmentation patients were studied. Implants included both smooth-surface and Siltex textured-surface models. Some implants were placed submuscularly and others subglandularly. None of the patients had capsular contracture. For comparison, 12 teardrop saline-filled implants in 6 breast augmentation patients were studied; all of these patients had BioCell textured-surface implants placed submuscularly, and none had capsular contracture. Results: Lateral radiographs with patients upright show that round and teardrop implants have similar teardrop shapes in vivo. Postoperative photographs also show a similar appearance. Lateral radiographs with patients recumbent show that the teardrop implant remains teardrop-shaped whereas the round implant settles back evenly. Conclusions: Although round and teardrop implants exhibit significantly different shapes on a table, they have similar teardrop shapes in vivo with patients upright. Because the appearance of the breasts with patients upright is similar for the 2 implant types, there is no basis for the claim that teardrop implants provide a more natural appearance. Round implants are actually more “anatomical” because they are teardrop-shaped with patients upright and settle back evenly with patients recumbent, as do normal breasts.