Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Calaes,Ivana Leme de
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Motta,Marcos Matias, Basso,Rafael de Campos, Calderoni,Davi Reis, Kharmandayan,Paulo
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502020000400801
Resumo: 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.
id SBDPC-1_2f57c48f83419583f46190ed6dffae29
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0102-86502020000400801
network_acronym_str SBDPC-1
network_name_str Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implantsSilicone ElastomersProstheses and ImplantsBreast ImplantsMammaplastyAbstract 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.Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia2020-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502020000400801Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira v.35 n.4 2020reponame:Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)instacron:SBDPC10.1590/s0102-865020200040000007info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCalaes,Ivana Leme deMotta,Marcos MatiasBasso,Rafael de CamposCalderoni,Davi ReisKharmandayan,Pauloeng2020-06-09T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-86502020000400801Revistahttps://www.bvs-vet.org.br/vetindex/periodicos/acta-cirurgica-brasileira/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||sgolden@terra.com.br0102-86501678-2674opendoar:2020-06-09T00:00Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants
title Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants
spellingShingle Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants
Calaes,Ivana Leme de
Silicone Elastomers
Prostheses and Implants
Breast Implants
Mammaplasty
title_short Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants
title_full Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants
title_fullStr Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants
title_full_unstemmed Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants
title_sort Comparative clinical evaluation of breast augmentation using silicone foam coated implants and textured implants
author Calaes,Ivana Leme de
author_facet Calaes,Ivana Leme de
Motta,Marcos Matias
Basso,Rafael de Campos
Calderoni,Davi Reis
Kharmandayan,Paulo
author_role author
author2 Motta,Marcos Matias
Basso,Rafael de Campos
Calderoni,Davi Reis
Kharmandayan,Paulo
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Calaes,Ivana Leme de
Motta,Marcos Matias
Basso,Rafael de Campos
Calderoni,Davi Reis
Kharmandayan,Paulo
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Silicone Elastomers
Prostheses and Implants
Breast Implants
Mammaplasty
topic Silicone Elastomers
Prostheses and Implants
Breast Implants
Mammaplasty
description 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.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502020000400801
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502020000400801
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/s0102-865020200040000007
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira v.35 n.4 2020
reponame:Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)
instacron:SBDPC
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)
instacron_str SBDPC
institution SBDPC
reponame_str Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
collection Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||sgolden@terra.com.br
_version_ 1752126445786759168