A Comparison of Textured versus Smooth-Surfaced Implants in Subfascial Breast Augmentation.

IF 3.2 2区医学 Q1 SURGERY

Plastic and reconstructive surgery Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-18 DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000011587

Tim Brown

{"title":"A Comparison of Textured versus Smooth-Surfaced Implants in Subfascial Breast Augmentation.","authors":"Tim Brown","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Subfascial placement of breast implants has the advantages of subglandular and submuscular placement without the adverse outcomes. This study examined the differences in outcomes between textured and smooth implants.Methods: A total of 385 patients underwent subfascial breast augmentation in 2 cohorts. The initial series ( n = 209) used textured implants and the second ( n = 176) used smooth implants. In all other respects, patient management was identical. Adverse outcomes, changes in breast morphometry, and patient satisfaction were compared between the 2 groups.Results: The follow-up period ranged from to 74 to 272 weeks for smooth implants (mean ± SD, 164 ± 50.6 weeks) and from 78 to 279 weeks for textured implants (mean ± SD, 186 ± 54 weeks). The incidence of capsular contracture was the same for smooth and textured implants (4.7% and 6.2%; P = 0.64). Changes in breast shape at the lower pole, patient satisfaction, and the incidence of other adverse outcomes were the same in both groups.Conclusion: Subfascial placement of smooth and textured breast implants yielded similar outcomes.Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"639-645"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011587","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Subfascial placement of breast implants has the advantages of subglandular and submuscular placement without the adverse outcomes. This study examined the differences in outcomes between textured and smooth implants.

Methods: A total of 385 patients underwent subfascial breast augmentation in 2 cohorts. The initial series ( n = 209) used textured implants and the second ( n = 176) used smooth implants. In all other respects, patient management was identical. Adverse outcomes, changes in breast morphometry, and patient satisfaction were compared between the 2 groups.

Results: The follow-up period ranged from to 74 to 272 weeks for smooth implants (mean ± SD, 164 ± 50.6 weeks) and from 78 to 279 weeks for textured implants (mean ± SD, 186 ± 54 weeks). The incidence of capsular contracture was the same for smooth and textured implants (4.7% and 6.2%; P = 0.64). Changes in breast shape at the lower pole, patient satisfaction, and the incidence of other adverse outcomes were the same in both groups.

Conclusion: Subfascial placement of smooth and textured breast implants yielded similar outcomes.

Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.

查看原文本刊更多论文

筋膜下隆胸术中纹理假体与光滑表面假体的比较。

背景：筋膜下植入乳房假体具有腺下植入和肌下植入的优点，但不会产生不良后果。本研究探讨了纹理假体和光滑假体在效果上的差异：方法：共有 385 名患者分两组接受了筋膜下隆胸术。方法：两组共 385 名患者接受了筋膜下隆胸术，第一组（209 人）使用了纹理假体，第二组（176 人）使用了光滑假体。在所有其他方面，对患者的管理都是相同的。对两组患者的不良后果、乳房形态变化和患者满意度进行了比较：光滑假体的随访期为74-272周（平均164周，STD=50.6），纹理假体的随访期为78-279周（平均=186周，STD=54）。光滑假体和纹理假体的包膜挛缩发生率相同（4.7% 和 6.2%，P=.64）。两组患者下极乳房形状的变化、患者满意度和其他不良后果的发生率相同：筋膜下植入光滑和有纹理的乳房假体结果相似。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Plastic and reconstructive surgery 医学-外科

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

13.90%

发文量

1436

审稿时长

1.5 months

期刊介绍： For more than 70 years Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® , the official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, is a benefit of Society membership, and is also available on a subscription basis. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair, cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medicolegal issues. The cosmetic section provides expanded coverage on new procedures and techniques and offers more cosmetic-specific content than any other journal. All subscribers enjoy full access to the Journal''s website, which features broadcast quality videos of reconstructive and cosmetic procedures, podcasts, comprehensive article archives dating to 1946, and additional benefits offered by the newly-redesigned website.