How can I increase the chances that fat transfered to my breast will stay and not be dissolved?

SOME of the grafted fat ALWAYS dies. Whatever dies can cause scar fibrosis and microcalcifications that can interfere with the detection of breast cancer via mammogram (not to mention lumps and firm spots from the dead fat blobs). Eating lots only enlarges the living fat--everywhere on your body. So the proportions will remain unchanged--you simply are fatter with proportionately fatter breasts. And the dead fat in your breasts will NOT enlarge, so it's really a negative to not exercise, eat too much, or try to selectively "feed" the fat in your breasts.(How is that done, BTW?) Protein or fat is not deposited in newly grafted breasts.When fat grafting is done for breast augmentation, the
scar tissue and calcium deposits make mammography more difficult to
detect cancers in their early stages, which show up like small dense
scars or microcalcifications. To be fair, most radiologists will state
that they can tell the difference between microcalcifications from dead
fat grafts and microcalcifications from fat killed by cancer cells. I
remain unconvinced that dead fat looks different from dead fat by
another mechanism in all cases. Maybe SOME, but not all!But
that's not really important either--it's YOUR life and possible delayed
or missed diagnosis from breast cancer that could be obscured by
elective fat graft breast augmentation. Since 11-12% of women will
develop breast cancer in their lifetime, it's a pretty big bet someone
is making with their patient's life when they put fat in a normal breast
to enlarge it, rather than using implants below the muscle, which have
been exhaustively proven to have NO influence on the development or
mammographic detection of breast cancer.BTW, I have absolutely
no problem with fat grafting for facial volume, improvement after
liposuction dents, or the like, and I believe fat grafting can be a
fabulous way of reconstructing breasts or enlarging reconstructive flaps
after mastectomy. But not in a normal breast that needs lifetime
examination, mammography (until something better is developed), and
hopefully early detection of the cancers over 11% of women WILL develop.So,
it's not that grafting fat is bad--in fact, it's great--just NOT IN A
NORMAL BREAST for elective augmentation. We have a better and safer
alternative--breast implants. BTW, since the dead fat causing
scar and calcifications is the cornerstone upon which I base my whole
discussion above, there are surgeons who claim up to 100% fat graft
"take," perhaps to sound like they are the "expert" in fat grafting, or
perhaps to deflect the concerns about dead fat causing scar densities
and microcalcifications. Most honest surgeons will tell you that no more
than 50-60% or so of the grafted fat will survive; the survival
percentage number gets higher the more the doctors think of themselves,
or the more they want to "market" their "superiority" (just ask them!),
or the more they want to avoid telling you that it takes more than one
operation to yield any volume that survives long-term. That's one reason Brava seems to be a big "seller!" No one really
wants to explain to you that fat grafting for breast enlargement not
only costs more, takes more time, and won't all survive, but that it
also takes a second session! You can't simply inject hundreds of cc's of
fat and expect it to all have adequate circulation and oxygenation. It
takes tiny grafts surrounded by living tissue for the grafts to remain
viable, and this takes lots of time, skill, placement expertise, and a
lot of recipient tissue to support all of the grafts. Oh wait, that's
the reason we're grafting in the first place--the recipient areas
(breasts) aren't very large; that's why the patient is asking for
enlargement! So injecting larger volumes of fat looks good at first,
right up until the dead fat cells start to be reabsorbed and carried
away by your body. This takes time, and occurs slowly enough that the
unscrupulous doctors usually have time to move on to other unsuspecting,
hopeful, and perhaps gullible patients who feel that "natural" just HAS
to be better than implants.Ain't so. And I will
continue to preach this right up until the lawsuits for "missed" breast
cancers or "delayed cancer diagnoses" leading to untimely deaths finally
expose this practice for what it is--potentially deadly and dangerous
for women with normal breasts who have been deceived into thinking that
fat grafts are natural and better than implants. BTW, I know implants
aren't "perfect" either. But over 50 years of use have made them the
most studied and safest medical products in the marketplace, and in the
human body!  AS for Brava, this is a cumbersome and time-consuming suction cup device that failed to enlarge breasts more than about half a cup size with weeks of use 8-10 hours DAILY! So, every surgeon who fell for the Brava system, found it didn't "work," is now using it to "enhance their graft take." Wait, aren't these the same doctors who are claiming 70, 80, 90% and more graft "take?" Why do they need to increase their "take?" Must be their superior technique, or maybe it's the Brava use! Is your surgeon letting you use the Brava for free? I didn't think so.If Brava really worked, then there would be similar interest in suction devices for penis enlargement. Oh, darn, they exist as well! Both are on the fringes of pseudoscience. Others would simply call both of these devices good old-fashioned horse-hockey.But do they work? If you really think so, I've got this great Popeil "pocket surgeon" that slices, dices, and makes great julienne fries. If you buy it right now, I can add a free "Pathomatic" for instant diagnosis. Please, spare me.Sorry; I know it was a serious question, but I truly believe you have failed to ask other appropriate questions:Does fat grafting present any potentially serious risks to my health and life? Can a radiologist guarantee me that his/her diagnosis will be as safe in a fat-grafted breast mammogram as in a non-grafted breast mammogram, or a submuscular implant-augmented breast mammogram? Is fat grafting better than breast implants? Do we really know the long-term on breast fat grafting? (We have 50+ years of experience with implants, and the present implants are the best and safest thus far.)You should exercise, eat properly in amounts your body needs to stay slim, say NO to Brava, and definitely say NO to breast fat grafting. If you were my wife or daughter that is what I'd tell you! Best wishes! Dr. Tholen

If you are comfortable with about a one cup size increase, fat transfer would be reasonable. If you want 2 or more cups, breast augmentation with implants would be better.Kenneth Hughes, MDLos Angeles, CA

I think the most important way to ensure that fat survives is to go to an experienced surgeon in this line of work.   It takes time to carefully remove the fat cells without causing undo damage.  It takes an efficient system to make sure the fat is not damaged or out of the body for too long.   It requires extreme patience to place each droplet of fat next to healthy viable tissue. Find the right surgeon in your area.  That is far more important than any dietary changes you can make.

Increasing fat graft survival depends on the amount of fat grafted and how it is placed.  The BRAVA device has also been shown to significantly increase survival of grafts and can be a good option in some patients (especially those with tight skin).  Hope that helps!