I was thinking more of 325cc range and a cohesive textured shaped implant may be right for you. I would think you can look at before and after picks to see how freakish the 485cc would look on you. Please see a few board certified plastic surgeons for consultation, Good Luck!
Thanks for your question. I would echo the recommendation of the other plastic surgeons here. 485cc seems out of proportion to your frame. In addition, high profile above the muscle with give a very "fake" or "augmented" look. To prevent capsular contracture texturing the implant is a good idea, but you should know that texturing will have the side effect of increased visible rippling.
If you would like to stay subglandular, I would encourage you to consider a form-stable or gummy bear implant. It has texturing without a fake look and very low chance of visible rippling. The size of the implant is a personal decision and you should discuss this in-person with a board certified plastic surgeon. Best of luck!
Thank you for your question and for sharing your photographs. I would strongly recommend seeking out additional consultations to discuss your anticipated breast augmentation surgery. At your height and weight 485cc implants would be quite large and likely not look natural based on your tight breast skin envelope. I would recommend placement of a smaller implant that is more proportional to your frame underneath your pectoralis muscle for the most natural appearing result. Hope this helps.
It is very difficult to determine the exact size and shape implant you will require to best match your ideal breast image without an examination by a board certified plastic surgeon. Not just any board certified plastic surgeon, but one with many years of frequently performing breast augmentation surgery including different approaches, techniques and implant choices. This is because several measurements not to mention your breast characteristics are needed to determine the optimal implant size to obtain your goals. Without knowing these dimensions it would be difficult to make this determination. For example, the existing base width of your breast will determine, in many cases, the maximal volume per implant profile that you can accommodate. To illustrate; a 100 cc difference may make a significant difference with a narrow base width breast, but much less of a difference if you have a wide chest wall and wide breast “foot print”. Therefore, just because your friend may have a great result with let’s say a 350 cc implant to make her go from a “A” cup to a “C” cup size does not mean that you will have the same result with the same size implant. . Further simply placing implants in a bra to determine the size best for you is not always accurate as the bra often distorts the size, is dependent on the pressure the bra places plus the implant is outside your breast and not under it among other variables. Computer software morphing programs that automatically determine the best implant size can be helpful in some but not all cases (e.g. doesn’t work well in my experience with existing implants, sagging or asymmetric breasts). Using “want to be” photos however are useful if simply provided to the surgeon as I will further explain in the below link
I specialize in athletes. I believe that a partial submuscular (dual plane) placement is the better option for most primary augmentation. The big advantages are that it provides more soft tissue coverage over the implant, decreasing the visibility of the edges (rippling), and decreasing risk of capsular contracture. Even though it won't hurt to do any chest exercise, I strongly discourage my athletes from performing chest exercises afterwards. There is no point. There is plenty of breast volume after with an implant. Performing chest exercises only puts pressure on the implants, and can lead to malposition and other issues.
My one restriction is powerlifters. As a former powerlifter myself, I know the intensity of the sport. I don't believe that these heavy powerlifting exercises can be sustained as a lifetime hobby. Much less, competitively. It is just too hard on the body. I will not perform a BA on patients who insist on continue to powerlift (bench press) as a hobby and/or competing. The risk of malposition, and implant issues is too high in my opinion. If you choose to do so anyways, I would encourage you to have annual follow up with your PS to make sure that your augmentation is performing correctly.
Definitely make an in-person consultation with a ABPS board certified PS to evaluate you and discuss your options.
Hope that helps and best wishes!
ABPS Board Certified
The best way
to determine implant size is based on chest wall measurements that fit your
body. Once we determine that we can choose the profile based on what you
want or need to achieve.
under the muscle, there is less risk of capsular contracture. Anatomic
implants tend to give a more natural shape with more nipple projection.
The best way
to assess and give true advice would be an in-person exam. Please see a
board-certified plastic surgeon that specializes in aesthetic and restorative
Best of luck!
Certified Plastic Surgeon
Hills Breast and Body Institute
Frankly 485 cc is too large for your body. Surgically any size can be stuffed into anybody. Artistically that is not the right way to go. Each body needs needs to be enhanced with proportionate size increment with implant size that suits it.
485 cc is obvious non fit.
The 485 cc breast implants are quite large for a thin person like you. Because you have little breast tissue and little body fat placing such a large textured implant on top of the muscle carries a very very high risk that the outline of the implant will be visible and the thick wall of the textured implant also can be palpable. Based on your photographs and history I would strongly urge you to consider having the implant placed partially under the muscle using the dual plane technique.
I would also consider a smaller implant to match your thin physique.
For what it is worth any recent meeting of experienced plastic surgeons a survey was done which revealed that 83% of experienced plastic surgeons in this particular survey use smooth round silicone gel implants.
There are pros and cons to the placement of breast implants in the “sub muscular” position versus the "sub glandular position”. The vast majority of breast implants placed in the "sub muscular" position are really being placed in the "dual plane" position ( partially sub muscular, partially sub glandular).
I think it is in the best interests of most patients (including serious athletes like yourself) seeking breast augmentation surgery to have implants placed in the “dual plane” or sub muscular position. This positioning allows for more complete coverage of the breast implants leading to generally more natural feel/look of the implants in the long-term. This position will also decrease the potential for rippling and/or palpability of the implants (which may increase with time, weight loss, and/or post-pregnancy changes).
The submuscular positioning also tends to interfere with mammography less so than breast implants in the sub glandular position. The incidence of breast implant encapsulation (capsular contraction) is also decreased with implants placed in the sub muscular position.
On the other hand, sub glandular breast implant positioning does not have the potential downside of “animation deformity” ( movement/ distortion of the breast implants seen with flexion of the pectoralis major muscle) they can be seen with breast implants placed in the sub muscular position.
I hope this, and the attached link, helps. Best wishes.