Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate whether silicone foam implants have a different evolution pattern compared to conventional texture implants. Methods: Fifty-eight female patients underwent surgery. They were divided into two groups (silicone foam – Lifesil® – and microtexturized silicone – Lifesil®). The evolution was analyzed in postoperative consultations, with physical examination, photographic documentation and filling in a satisfaction questionnaire, in the postoperative period of one month, four months, one year and then annually, up to a maximum of 3 years of follow-up. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in presence of rippling, stretch marks, breast ptosis, capsular contracture and quality of scars. There was a higher rate of patients who were very satisfied with the outcome 360 days after surgery in the group receiving silicone foam implants (p = 0.036). Conclusion: In short time, silicone foam envelope implants proved to be as reliable as textured silicone envelope implants, making them an option for augmentation mammoplasty.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
de Calaes, I. L., Motta, M. M., Basso, R. de C., Calderoni, D. R., & Kharmandayan, P. (2020). Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants. Acta Cirurgica Brasileira, 35(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-865020200040000007
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.