36 year old, Very flat chested AA, Can I achieve a full C-small D? (Photo)

Most patients want to have the fullest breast profile that still looks natural on their body. The limiting factor for implant size is almost always the appearance of the upper pole. At some implant volume, the upper pole of the breast begins to look excessively rounded or convex, and that is a look that says "breast implants live here".A common
error that leads to an unnatural appearance after breast augmentation, even
with implants of an ideal size, is inadequate lower pole dissection and/or
inadequate release of the pectoralis major origin just above the inframammary
fold. As a result the implants sit too high and appear excessively full in the
upper poles (the area above the nipple-areola complex), while the lower poles -
which should be the fullest area of the breast - are underfilled. Inadequate
muscle release may also result in bizarre-appearing breast implant animation
when the pec major muscle contracts. In some cases this may result in one or
both of their implants jumping up literally to the level of a patient's
collarbones - an alarmingly unnatural look, and one that is totally avoidable

 

A shaped form stable breast implant can give the patient
the lowest risk of fold and ripples in the lower pole, the lowest risk of a
visible transition between natural breast tissue and implant  (sometime
refereed to as a double bubble) and the lowest risk of breast implant
malposition with the breasts bottoming out. I think there is a performance
difference between form stable breast implants. Consult with plastic surgeon
who have experience and expertise perfuming this particular procedure. 

 

In many breast augmentation patients,
the inframammary fold needs to be lowered in order to allow the implant to rest
at a level that appears natural relative to the position of the nipple and
areola. Ideally the implant should be centered directly behind the
nipple-areola complex (NAC). In profile, the natural-appearing breast is not
convex in the upper pole, and an excessively convex and overly full upper pole
is a dead giveaway that a breast implant sits below the skin. In addition,
inadequate release of the inferior origin of the pectoralis major will allow
the muscle to hold the implant in too high a position, and may even cause the
implant to displace upwards (as high as the collar bone in some patients) when
the muscle contracts. Patients with this problem require reoperation to release
the inferior origin of the pec major and/or the inframammary fold.

Likewise, if the inframammary fold is lowered too far, the
augmented breast will appear 'bottomed out', with an excessively full lower
pole, an empty upper pole, and a nipple/areola that appears to sit too high on
the breast - another situation with a distinctly unnatural appearance, and one
that requires surgical correction: repair of the inframammary fold(s).Find a plastic surgeon with considerable experience in providing natural looking results for women with very minimal breast tissue.  

Since there are no standard and uniform definitions of cup size, I am reluctant to predict size after surgery. Some surgeon estimate a cup size increase for every 150-250 cc.  The cups are smaller on a 32 band than on a 34 or larger, so the 150 cc may be the better guess, and just a guess it is. Since there is so little breast tissue, your breasts will have a shape similar to the implant shape, and will at that size look less natural than they would on someone starting with more breast tissue. In general I would favor a smaller size, and would consider shaped implants.All the best.