Next Article in Journal
Addition of Multimodal Immunotherapy to Combination Treatment Strategies for Children with DIPG: A Single Institution Experience
Next Article in Special Issue
Autologous Biologic Treatment with Fat, Bone Marrow Aspirate and Platelet Rich Plasma Is an Effective Alternative to Total Knee Arthroplasty for Patients with Moderate Knee Arthrosis
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
Stem Cell Clinical Trials in Spinal Cord Injury: A Brief Review of Studies in the United States
Article

Silicone Implant Versus Silicone Implant Assisted by Stromal Enriched Lipograft Breast Augmentation: A Prospective Comparative Study

Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Department, Metropolitan General Hospital, 264 Mesogeion Avenue, 15562 Athens, Greece
Medicines 2020, 7(5), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicines7050028
Received: 30 March 2020 / Revised: 7 May 2020 / Accepted: 12 May 2020 / Published: 19 May 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Stem Cell Treatment)
Background: Implant-assisted breast augmentation is among the most performed surgeries performed by plastic surgeons today. This prospective study evaluated the patient satisfaction and complication rates using high-profile round silicone implant alone (traditional breast augmentation) Group A versus the high-profile round silicone implant assisted with stromal enriched lipograft (composite breast augmentation) Group B. Methods: A total of 50 female patient candidates to undergo breast augmentation between January to September 2017 were randomly assigned to either group. The periareolar technique for breast augmentation and the subfascial plane were used in both groups for the insertion of the high-profile round silicone implants. The stromal enriched lipograft (SEL) was used in Group B for the preparation of the autologous fat grafting to the breast. The satisfaction of each patient with body appearance following breast augmentation was rated using an already published scale of 1–5. The rate of complications was analysed. Results: AS performed all the surgeries. In Group A, the age range was between 19 and 48 years (mean of 22.5 years). In Group B, the age range was between 20 and 47 years (mean of 24.1 years). The average BMI of Group A was 24 m/kg2 and 23 m/kg2 of Group B. Patient satisfaction meta-analysis for Group A and B at 12 months shows that patients in Group B expressed a satisfaction that is superior when compared to Group A patients. The ability to camouflage the implant could explain the higher satisfaction rates in Group B. The rate of complications appears similar in both groups. Conclusions: Composite breast augmentation using a combination of round high-profile implants and SEL in breast augmentation can achieve a higher patient satisfaction and aesthetic outcome as compared to the round high-profile breast augmentation alone. The technique is safe, simple and fast with low complication rates. Large multicentre, controlled, prospective studies need to be performed to further confirm the favourable results that were observed in this study. View Full-Text
Keywords: stromal enriched lipograft; breast augmentation; composite augmentation; fat grafting; breast implant; mastopexy stromal enriched lipograft; breast augmentation; composite augmentation; fat grafting; breast implant; mastopexy
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Sterodimas, A. Silicone Implant Versus Silicone Implant Assisted by Stromal Enriched Lipograft Breast Augmentation: A Prospective Comparative Study. Medicines 2020, 7, 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicines7050028

AMA Style

Sterodimas A. Silicone Implant Versus Silicone Implant Assisted by Stromal Enriched Lipograft Breast Augmentation: A Prospective Comparative Study. Medicines. 2020; 7(5):28. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicines7050028

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sterodimas, Aris. 2020. "Silicone Implant Versus Silicone Implant Assisted by Stromal Enriched Lipograft Breast Augmentation: A Prospective Comparative Study" Medicines 7, no. 5: 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicines7050028

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop