Saline or Silicone, Whats The Difference

Saline implants are just empty shells. They're surgically placed then filled with a salt water solution. Since this implant is so small when it's placed, the incision can also be quite small. This small incision leaves a much smaller scar. The silicone implant is a cover or envelope containing a silicone substance. This implant requires a larger incision for placement.

The United States places restrictions on silicone implants. Even though these restrictions have been considerably lessened in the past few years, the saline implant is still the most common implant used in America. Quality results can be expected from saline implants, but they can be more likely to suffer from cosmetic problems. Women with thin breast tissue may have the most problems.

Rippling and wrinkling of the implant may be seen. There's also the possibility of noticing the implant itself, either by sight or by touch. Women with more breast tissue don't generally have this issue. It's for this reason that most surgeons prefer the silicone implant for post-mastectomy reconstruction.

Silicone implants are more widely used outside the United States than saline. They're considered by most surgeons to be more realistic in appearance. Methods have been developed to hide the scar left by the large incision the silicone implant requires. The newest version has shown the potential for significant improvements over the older products. Even though the leaked silicone hasn't been shown to cause health problems, the possibility of leakage is still a concern.
Read more...

Breast Implant Ruptures

A saline implant rupture results in quick deflation and is easily removed. Recent FDA approved studies show rupture/deflation rates of 3-5% at 3 years and 7-10% at 5 years. Older studies depended on clinical exams to determine rupture rates.

Recent reports have determined these exams aren't adequate to evaluate rupture rates. One study reported ruptures in asymptomatic patients are correctly detected by experienced plastic surgeons 30% of the time. This is compared to a detection rate of 86% by MRIs.

The FDA currently recommends MRIs be used to screen for ruptures beginning three years after implantation and continuing every two years thereafter.

Other countries consider MRIs useful only in cases of suspected ruptures and to confirm ultrasound or mammographic studies suggesting a rupture.

Silicone implant ruptures rarely result in deflation. The silicone leaks into the space around the implant. This indicates the need for removal of the implant. The risk and treatment of extracapsular leakage is controversial. It's agreed the gel is difficult to remove, but theres disagreement about the health effects.

The majority of MRI data for silicone gel implants indicates after 11 years, most women had at least one ruptured implant with silicone leakage outside the capsule of 21% of the women. The available long term data deals with 3rd and 4th generation implants and shows a 15-30% risk of silent rupture. MRI evaluation of the 5th generation implants implies improved durability. A rupture rate of 1% or less at an average age of six years is reported. Read more...

Breast Augmentation - Not A New Idea

Breast augmentation isn't new. It's not even a twentieth century idea. Women have been trying to improve on nature for centuries. It was only a matter of time before women turned to science and medicine for aid.

In 1889, paraffin injections were tried. The results of this were disastrous. 1895 is the earliest known use of implants. The first one was done by the German surgeon, Vincenz Czerny. He used the adipose tissue (the fatty tissue) from the woman's back. This benign growth or a lipoma, seemed appropriate because they're comprised of fatty tissues, soft to the touch and moveable.

Between 1895 and the early to mid-1900's many other substances were tried. Glass balls, ox cartilage, ivory, Terylene wood, polyethylene chips, ground rubber, polyester, Silastic rubber and Teflon-silicone prostheses were some of the choices.

In 1945 and 1950 attempts were made to rotate the woman's chest wall tissue into the breast to add volume. Different synthetics were used during the 1950s and 1960s. An estimated 50,000 women received injections of silicone. In some of these women, hardening of the breasts and development of silicone granulomas (small nodules) were so severe, mastectomies were needed for treatment. 30 years after these treatments, women are still seeking medical services from complications resulting from these injections.

Today's implants are much safer and the instances of complications have been greatly reduced. Hopefully, medical science will be able to keep up with women's attempts to improve on their natural gifts. Read more...