Silicone Gel Breast Implants Research Articles

Antioxidant Status in Patients after Breast Mastopexy and Augmentation.

Background and Objectives: Mammary gland surgery has become very common, but there are complications of these operations, including the concept of breast implant illness (BII) in women with silicone gel breast implants (SBI), who suffer from various symptoms such as myalgia, arthralgia, fatigue, fever, dry eyes, or dry mouth. Silicone biomaterials are synthetic polymers that have their own physical and chemical properties and can exert their effect at the site of use and possibly on the general status of the body, causing inflammation and oxidative stress signs. The aim of the study was to examine components of the blood antioxidant system (AOS) of the mastopexy and breast augmentation patients before the operation, on the first post-op day, and 6 months after surgery. Materials and Methods: Healthy breast surgery patients (women aged 31 to 60 years without visible pathologies) were selected for the study and formed 2 groups: breast lift-mastopexy without silicone biomaterials (I group, 30 patients) and breast augmentation using silicone biomaterials (II group, 28 patients). All patients underwent standard preoperative tests. Glutathione peroxidase (GPxSe) and gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) in blood, selenium (Se), selenium protein P (SelPP), and total antioxidant status (TAS) in plasma were measured as AOS parameters. The concentration of vitamin D was also determined. A total of 174 blood tests were performed. Results: Overall, there were no differences in both groups in measured antioxidant system indicators over time; neither changes in objective nor subjective status were observed. However, baseline activity of GPxSe was relatively high but restored to normal values 6 months after surgery. In the mastopexy group, GPxSe decreased from 12,961.7 U/L by 18.9% to 10,513.4 U/L, and in the breast augmentation group, from 15,505.0 U/L by 25.1% to 11,265.5 U/L, which is a decrease of 18.9% and 25.1%, respectively. The patients did not note any complaints; other indicators of standard biochemical tests were within normal limits. Conclusions: The two types of surgical interventions, breast mastopexy and augmentation of the mammary glands, do not significantly impact blood AOS and are physiological in nature.

MAMAS (mastopexy–augmentation made applicable and safer): A standardized template of pre-operative marking and step-by-step surgical procedure

Simultaneous breast augmentation with mastopexy is growing in popularity. It is a complex procedure that can lead to post-operative complications, patient dissatisfaction, and increased risk of litigation. The aim of this study is to describe an approach for the inverted-T augmentation-mastopexy technique, which limits intraoperative modifications, minimizes errors, and decreases post-operative complications and patient dissatisfaction.The study included 107 patients with Regnault's grade I and II ptosis and severe pseudoptosis. All patients were marked according to our novel technique, Mastopexy Augmentation Made Applicable and Safer (MAMAS), and operated by a single surgeon. All patients underwent simultaneous breast augmentation with Siltex Mentor Round Silicone Gel breast implants and mastopexy. Pre-operatively and post-operatively, patients filled the BREAST-Q. The mean follow-up was 24 months.Hundred and seven women received treatment in this study. Sixteen presented with post-operative complications, eleven in the early stage of recovery, and five in the late stage. There were eight cases of minor wound healing complications, all treated conservatively. Two cases of infection were noted, both were treated with oral antibiotics. One patient experienced post-operative bleeding after 13 days, which required surgical revision. In the late stage of recovery, five cases of implant displacement occurred and required revision surgery. No cases of capsular contracture and seromas were reported. According to Breast-Q, all patients were satisfied.MAMAS surgical technique, focusing on precise pre-operative marking for augmentation-mastopexy, is simple and easily reproducible. The procedure has a low complication rate and high patient satisfaction. It provides predictable and stable results over time.

Rupture of 40-year-old silicone gel breast implants: a case report

BackgroundImplant rupture is one of the complications of breast augmentation surgery. The rupture of silicone implants is often insidious, potentially causing problems at any time. This is a case report of the rupture of 145-cc breast implants manufactured by Dow Corning Corporation and their removal at 40 years after augmentation.Case PresentationA 70-year-old female patient was admitted for the removal of a lump in the upper and inner quadrants of the right breast. After a detailed examination, a rupture of the bilateral breast implants was diagnosed. Explantation without replacement was performed; the entire procedure proceeded smoothly. Immunohistochemical staining revealed siliconoma with lymphoid hyperplasia and calcification in the bilateral breasts with no signs of malignancy.ConclusionsSilicone breast augmentation is one of the most popular aesthetic surgical procedures worldwide. Therefore, it is important to educate patients on the need for close monitoring of their implants after augmentation through magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound to facilitate early detection of any changes before a rupture occurs. Early detection of the implant rupture, in turn, will facilitate early and effective management.

Safety and Efficacy of the Sientra Silicone Gel Round and Shaped Breast Implants: 6-Year Results of the U.S. Postapproval Study.

After approval of Sientra silicone gel breast implants in March of 2012, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration required completion of a 10-year U.S. postapproval study. The authors present results from the first 6 years of this study. An ongoing, open-label, prospective, multicenter study is being conducted to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of Sientra implants in patients undergoing breast augmentation, reconstruction, and revision in the postmarket environment. Enrollment of 5197 patients (10,327 implants) was completed on March 6, 2015 (4046 primary augmentation, 895 revision-augmentation, 149 primary reconstruction, and 107 revision-reconstruction). Analyses were conducted at year 6 (database lock: January 24, 2022). Across all cohorts who received an implant, the Kaplan-Meier risk of investigator-reported Baker grade III/IV capsular contracture was 4.1% (3.9% with submuscular placement and 6.75%with subglandular placement), the risk of reoperation was 11.6%, and the risk of implant removal was 7.8% (5.9% with implant replacement and 2.0% without replacement). The primary reason (>50%) for reoperation was aesthetic (eg, style/size change). The Kaplan-Meier risk of rupture, calculated for patients who underwent explantation or MRI for rupture evaluation, was 5.8%. Overall, 82.6% of patients were highly satisfied/happy with their implant. No cases of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma were reported. Six-year results of the postapproval study were consistent with the 10-year core study and provide additional evidence in a large data set supporting the comprehensive safety and effectiveness profile of the Sientra implants.

Nagor Impleo Round Silicone Gel Breast Implants: Early Outcome Analysis after 340 Primary Breast Augmentations.

For decades, implant-based breast augmentation has been one of the most performed surgical procedures for cosmetic purposes around the world. Hence, novel manufactured implants should be critically investigated to prove them safe and effective. Here, the authors describe the first independently conducted clinical study on Nagor Impleo textured round breast implants. For this retrospective study, outcomes of 340 consecutive female patients undergoing primary cosmetic breast augmentation were analyzed. Demographic and surgical data as well as outcomes and complications were evaluated. Furthermore, a survey concerning effectiveness and aesthetic satisfaction after breast augmentation was examined. All 680 implants were placed in a submuscular plane with incisions at the inframammary fold. The main indications for surgery were hypoplasia and hypoplasia with asymmetry. The mean implant volume was 390 cc and the main type of projection was high profile. The most common complications were hematoma and capsular contracture (0.9 percent, respectively). The overall revision rate for complications was 2.4%. Additionally, almost all patients showed increased quality of life and aesthetic satisfaction after a breast augmentation. Hence, all patients would undergo breast augmentation again with these newly launched devices. Nagor Impleo implants demonstrate a low complication rate and high safety profile. Although high aesthetic satisfaction and quality of life results were achieved, analysis of an even larger series over a longer period of time would be beneficial to evaluate the reliability of this implant.

Gel Cohesivity and Breast Augmentation: Applications to Clinical Practice.

Abstract Matching breast implant gel cohesivity to the patient’s needs based on anatomical and soft tissue considerations and patient preferences is essential to optimizing aesthetic outcomes and patient satisfaction. Generally, gel cohesivity contributes to the feel and shape of the breast, which reflects volume distribution within the breast. Studies on the physical properties of silicone gel breast implants have established the relative cohesivity of implants from several manufacturers. Comprehensive patient education, tissue-based preoperative planning, and a thorough understanding of how implant properties may affect outcomes are recommended before breast augmentation. This review summarizes the literature on breast implant physical properties with a focus on gel cohesivity and translates gel cohesivity to practical considerations in choosing the right implant for the right patient in primary augmentation. Based on clinical experience, the authors generally recommend lower-cohesivity implants for patients who desire a tapered upper pole or a natural appearance/“anatomic shape” as well as for those with a high body mass index or a large amount of native breast tissue. Medium-cohesivity implants are most widely used and are appropriate for those with ptosis/augmentation mastopexy, patients with tight skin envelope, and for those seeking upper pole fullness. A high-cohesivity implant is recommended for patients desiring a round shape, those with constricted lower poles, and patients with a postpartum loose envelope, a thin, soft tissue envelope, or fibrous breast tissue.

Effect of External Heating on Silicone Gel Breast Implants: Can Heat Exposure Precipitate Burns and Implant-Related Complications?

Effect of External Heating on Silicone Gel Breast Implants: Can Heat Exposure Precipitate Burns and Implant-Related Complications?

Cytotoxicity, Inflammatory Activity, and Angiogenesis Are Induced by Different Silicone Implants.

The aim of this study was to investigate cytotoxicity, inflammatory response, and angiogenesis induced by silicone gel breast implants with different textured surfaces in vitro and in vivo. In the in vitro study, murine fibroblast cells (L929) were cultured for 1, 3, and 5 days with silicone membranes of three different textures: nanotextured, microtextured, and silicone foam. In the in vivo study, a total of 30 male rats (Rattus, norvegicus, albinos, Wistar) were distributed into three groups (10 animals per group), with 2 implants in each rat: nanotextured silicone gel breast implants group, microtextured silicone gel breast implants group, and silicone gel breast foam implants group. The Alamar Blue assay detected higher viability of cells cultured in the presence of nanotextured silicone surface for 1 and 3 days. The MTT assay showed higher cytotoxicity of silicone foam after 1 and 3 days of exposure. Nanotextured silicone breast implants induced a more prolonged inflammatory response, denoting a delay in the healing process and subsequent organization of the fibrous capsule as depicted by the collagen fiber types found. VEGF expression did not differ between experimental groups. Gel foam breast implants are more biocompatible when compared to micro- or nano-textured silicone breast implants.

Silent Rupture of Silicone Gel Breast Implants: High-Resolution Ultrasound Scans and Surveys of 584 Women.

Background:Patient compliance has been low for U.S. Food and Drug Administration–recommended magnetic resonance imaging scans to screen silicone gel breast implants for silent rupture. High-resolution ultrasound scans are a convenient, in-office alternative that may improve screening compliance; however, women’s attitudes and feelings about silent rupture and their desire for rupture screening are unknown.Methods:Plastic surgeons and staff in nine private practices received 1-day training in high-resolution ultrasound scanning, then screened women with silicone gel implants implanted since 2000. Suspect scans were reviewed by a high-resolution ultrasound–experienced plastic surgeon to determine if they showed ruptures. Surgical and scan findings were correlated. To learn attitudes and feelings about silent rupture, women took surveys before and after the scan.Results:Of 584 women screened, 82 (14.0 percent) had scans showing ruptures; of 1153 implants, 92 (8.0 percent) showed ruptures. Forty women with scans showing ruptures underwent surgery, of which 30 (75 percent) had their ruptures confirmed. Surveys found 99.5 percent of women want to know if they have a rupture and 95.2 percent want the ruptured implant removed. If the scan showed no rupture, women felt relieved and 95.5 percent would get future high-resolution ultrasound screening for silent rupture. If a rupture was found, women expressed various concerns and 87.8 percent would remove the ruptured implant within 12 months.Conclusions:Surveys show that women with silicone gel implants have concerns and feel anxious about possible silent rupture. Based on 14 percent of women showing a ruptured implant on high-resolution ultrasound scans and 75 percent of ruptures on high-resolution ultrasound scans surgically confirmed, 10.6 percent of women in this study have a silent rupture.CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Diagnostic, IV.

Assessment of Silicone Particle Migration Among Women Undergoing Removal or Revision of Silicone Breast Implants in the Netherlands

Silicone breast implants have been on the market for breast augmentation or breast reconstruction for approximately 60 years but may lead to medical complications, also called breast implant illness. To evaluate the existence of silicone gel bleed and migration over a long time period, including the period in which the newer cohesive silicone gel breast implants were used. In this single-center case series, capsule tissue and lymph node samples were collected from women who underwent removal or revision of silicone breast implants from January 1, 1986, to August 18, 2020, and data were extracted from the pathological reports and revision of the histology if data were missing. All tissues were examined using standard light microscopy, some extended with modified oil red O staining and energy-dispersive radiographic spectroscopy. A total of 365 women had capsular tissue removed, including 15 patients who also had lymph nodes removed, and 24 women had only lymph nodes removed. Data were analyzed from January to May 2021. Silicone breast implants. The main outcome was presence or absence of silicones inside or outside the capsule. One-way analysis of variance was used to determine significance between groups. Among a total of 389 women with silicone breast implants (mean [SD] age, 50.5 [11.2] years), 384 women (98.8%) had silicone particles present in the tissues, indicating silicone gel bleed. In 337 women (86.6%), silicone particles were observed outside the capsule (ie, in tissues surrounding the capsule and/or lymph nodes), indicating silicone migration. In 47 women (12.1%), silicone particles were only present within the capsule. In 5 women (1.2%), no silicone particles were detected in the tissues. Patients were divided into 2 groups, with 46 women who received cohesive silicone gel breast implants and 343 women who received either an older or a newer type of breast implant. There were no differences in silicone gel bleed or migration between groups (silicone detected outside or inside capsule: 44 women [95.7%] vs 340 women [99.1%]; P = .19). In this case series including women with noncohesive or cohesive silicone gel breast implants, silicone leakage occurred in 98.8% of women, indicating silicone gel bleed, and in 86.6% of women, migration of silicone particles outside the capsule was detected.

An Algorithm for Management of Cosmetic and Reconstructive Patients with Textured Implants: An Institutional Experience.

Textured anatomic silicone gel breast implants have advantages of gel cohesivity and a natural slope between the upper and lower poles of the breast; however, they have fallen out of favor secondary to their risk of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma. For patients who choose to keep their textured devices, there remains controversy over the best long-term follow-up. This article presents an algorithm from plastic surgery, surgical oncology, and radiology at the Massachusetts General Hospital for management of these patients.

Surgical Treatment of Capsular Contracture (CC): Literature Review and Outcomes Utilizing Implants in Revisionary Surgery

The objective of this clinical review is to provide an overview of the use of breast implants after capsular contracture (CC) surgical treatment, with a focus on type of implants used. Furthermore, our experience in this field is also reviewed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar databases were reviewed to identify literature related to surgical treatment of capsular contracture and implant replacement. Each article was reviewed by two independent reviewers to ensure all relevant publications were identified. The literature search identified 54 applicable articles. Of these, 26 were found to have a therapeutic level of evidence. The reference lists in each relevant paper were screened manually to include relevant papers not found through the initial search. Only four articles report the replacement of implants after surgical treatment of capsular contracture. Six articles reported an implant exchange with only smooth silicone gel filled implants. Two reviews advice to use smooth implants in implant replacement. With our expertise in the field and the results of this up-to-date literature review, it can be concluded that implant exchange is recommended in case of breast revision for capsular contracture, and the use of subpectoral smooth silicone gel breast implants is a good option after surgical treatment in patients with primary or recurrence Baker III-IV. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Periprosthetic Infection in Primary and Secondary Augmentation Mammoplasty Using Round Silicone Gel Breast Implants: Comparative Analysis of 2521 Primary and 386 Secondary Mammoplasties in a Single Surgeon Practice.

Wounds are generally classified as clean, clean contaminated, contaminated and dirty. Aesthetic surgery, including breast augmentation, is classified as clean or clean contaminated. The presence of bacteria on the skin, in nipple secretions, in superficial and deep parenchymal samples and also the presence of bacteria in capsules and on implants justifies the use of antibiotics. However, there is a paucity of information about whether added bacterial flora on the capsule of the implant pockets, and the handling of these capsules as capsulotomy or capsulectomy makes secondary augmentation mammoplasty more prone to wound healing issues or periprosthetic infection. The current study is the analysis carried out between primary and secondary augmentation mammoplasties to look at the incidence of periprosthetic infection between the two groups. A retrospective data analysis for periprosthetic infection and wound healing issues following primary and secondary augmentation mammoplasties performed between April 1999 and April 2019 was carried out. A total of 2521 (5042 breasts) primary and 386 (772 breasts) secondary augmentation mammoplasty data were available for analysis. Periprosthetic infection was seen in 0.7% and 0.5% of the primary and secondary augmentations, respectively, with no significant difference. Wound healing issues were significantly higher in primary augmentation mammoplasty. There was a marginally higher incidence of periprosthetic infection in primary augmentation mammoplasty as compared to secondary augmentation mammoplasty; however, the difference was not significant. On the contrary, the wound healing and superficial skin issues were higher in primary as compared to secondary augmentation mammoplasty, and the difference was statistically significant. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these evidence-based medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

PMD50 USING SOCIAL MEDIA TO CHARACTERIZE ADVERSE EVENTS: A CASE STUDY OF BREAST IMPLANT ILLNESS

Reports from recipients of breast implants about a diverse set of symptoms has led to the use of the term “breast implant illness” (BII), though no precise clinical definition of a symptom complex has been established. Breast implant options include both saline- and silicone-containing devices with textured or smooth surfaces. Using social media analysis, we qualitatively explored patients’ experience of complaints associated with different types of breast implants. We identified posts on 3 breast implant patient support websites between 2010-2019. Using natural language processing, we searched the post texts for symptoms from the FDA’s list of suspected BII symptoms, such as redness, swelling, skin rash, fatigue and any other mentioned complications. We tabulated complaints reported in posts by implant type. Posts included ≥1 complaint. There were 2,518 posts mentioning saline and 5,470 mentioning silicone gel breast implants. The most common complaints for saline implants were rupture (19.5%), wrinkling/rippling (19.2%), redness/bruising/skin rash (16.1%), inflammation/irritation (10.4%), malposition/displacement/ asymmetry (6.4%), infection (6.1%), deflation (4.9%), capsular contracture (4.0%), and tiredness/fatigue (2.9%). The complaints for silicone implants followed a similar pattern except that redness/bruising/skin rash was more frequent (24.2%), wrinkling/rippling (14.0%) and deflation were less common (0.7%). Brain fog and trouble concentrating were rarely mentioned (<1%). Comparing smooth and textured breast implants, wrinkling/rippling was more frequently mentioned for textured (25.3%) vs smooth (14.9%), while redness/bruising/skin rash was more frequent with smooth (33.0%) vs textured (21.6%). Malposition/displacement was more common for textured (5.4%) vs smooth implants (1.6%). Tiredness/fatigue (4.8% vs 1.7%) and brain fog/trouble concentrating/confusion/not thinking clearly (1.3% vs 0.5%) were mentioned more for smooth vs textured implants. Social media analysis using NLP may be useful to provide insights and qualitative characterization of experience of complications among breast implant recipients. However, multiple factors may influence differences, not just implant type.

Silicone Gel Breast Implants: Past, Present, and Future.

The authors have provided an in-depth review of the history of saline and silicone gel-filled breast implants. In the history of medicine, no devices have been more scrutinized and thoroughly studied than breast implants. Although we as plastic surgeons recognize and appreciate the benefits that our patients derive from these devices, society as a whole continues to remain skeptical. The reasons for this are complex and multifactorial but appear to be fueled by the media, oppositional organizations, and several trial lawyers. Prior to 1990, when the silicone gel implant controversy began, there were only eight indexed publications that dealt with the issue of silicone gel breast implants. Since 1990, there have been more than 500 indexed publications dealing with silicone gel implants. At the time of the moratorium in 1992, we as plastic surgeons did not have a leg to stand on because there was a paucity of scientific evidence to support our observations that silicone breast implants were safe and effective devices.

A Simple and Low-cost Method of Sleeve to Insert Silicone Gel Breast Implants.

Summary:Contact between silicone implants and skin/breast parenchyma has been described as an agent of implant contamination and biofilm formation, resulting in implant complications. The no-touch technique was introduced to avoid implant contact and reduce skin/breast contamination. The authors propose an easily available sleeve option using a saline sterile plastic container that provides elastic and transparent protection for inserting silicone implants. These sterile containers can be easily converted into a sleeve by cutting off the narrow end of the container, which then easily fits into the small inframammary, periareolar, and transaxillary incisions. The authors have performed this technique in 10 patients (20 implants) undergoing primary breast augmentation or revision breast surgery, with microtexturized implants ranging in size from 255 to 500 ml (mean, 325 ml) and obtained satisfactory results with no cases of complications. Our clinical outcome shows that this new sleeve does not interact with the implant or the patient’s skin and soft tissues and has the added advantage of low cost compared with similar available devices, but further randomized and controlled studies are required to corroborate this effect.

Smooth Prosthesis: Our Experience and Current State of Art in the Use of Smooth Sub-muscular Silicone Gel Breast Implants.

The objective of this clinical review is to provide an overview of the use of silicone gel-filled breast implants placed in the sub-muscular position, with a focus on complication rates reported for both smooth and textured implants. Furthermore, our experience in this field is also reviewed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Central and Google Scholar databases were reviewed to identify the literature related to smooth breast implants. Each article was reviewed by two independent reviewers to ensure all relevant publications were identified. The literature search identified 98 applicable articles. Of these, just a few articles were found to have a therapeutic level of evidence. The reference lists in each relevant paper were screened manually to include relevant papers not found through the initial search. Eight articles report the risk of capsular contracture when the breast implants were placed in the sub-muscular position. Six of these articles report a similar rate of capsular contracture in smooth and textured implants. Local complications such as wrinkling, late seroma and double capsules were found to be associated with the use of textured breast implants (4 articles). All articles concerning BIA-ALCL reported a total absence occurring in smooth breast implants. All cases have been associated with textured mammary prostheses. With our expertise in the field and the results of this up-to-date literature review, it can be concluded that there are no significant advantages of using one type of implant surface over the other when placed in the sub-pectoral position. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Round Form-Stable Breast Implants: Diagnosis and Management of Complications.

Silicone gel breast implants have been used for breast augmentation and reconstruction since 1962. Since then, multiple generations of implants have been created in an effort to improve safety and efficacy. Before 1990, silicone gel implants were characterized as having thin shells and non-cohesive gel; however, since then devices are created with cohesive silicone gel and a variety of surfaces. Despite improvements, no implant will last forever; however, these devices are safe and effective based on numerous clinical and epidemiologic studies. As with all medical devices, complications using round form-stable implants for breast reconstruction can occur and will be reviewed in this article.

How to do the bottle suction method for removal of a silicone gel breast implant

There is a growing prevalence of silicone breast implant rupture and need for removal. This article identifies a novel method of removing silicone gel breast implants which addresses issues identified with the current methods. Our technique is an efficient and effective method but most importantly complies to strict Therapeutic Goods Administration guidelines for equipment used in surgery.

Expert Consensus on the Use of a New Bioengineered, Cell-Friendly, Smooth Surface Breast Implant.

BackgroundAlthough general guidelines are available for established silicone gel breast implants, the unique characteristics of the latest Motiva implants warrant specific guidelines.ObjectivesThis study aimed to generate consensus recommendations and summarize expert-based advice to better understand current surgical practices and to establish guidelines for surgeons transitioning from other implant devices to the Motiva implants.MethodsA survey was compiled by 12 plastic surgeon experts in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery and 1 biotechnology scientist, and distributed to 36 plastic surgeons to establish a consensus on the use of these devices. Surgical techniques, complication rates, and implant selection were among the topics discussed.ResultsThe experts agreed on 3 core principles regarding the use of Motiva Round and Ergonomix implants. Firstly, the dissected pocket needs to be close fitting and steps must be taken to prevent expansion of the pocket. Secondly, implant selection must be individualized. Finally, surgical planning and technique must be carefully considered. When questioned about problems they had ecountered, 84.6% of the experts agreed that they experienced fewer overall complications and 76.9% confirmed reduced capsular contracture rates with these devices. Overall, 84.6% of the experts favored selecting Motiva Ergonomix implants over Round implants to achieve a more natural look. In addition, 92.3% of the experts agreed that Motiva implants, due to their innovative technology, reduce the risk of anaplastic large-cell lymphoma.ConclusionsThis international consensus of leading practitioners will assist plastic surgeons with patient selection, preoperative planning, and surgical technique. These recommendations are designed to optimize surgical outcomes, resulting in lower overall complication rates, more natural-looking breasts, and highly satisfied patients.