Why does Europe primarily use textured implants whereas the US still primarily uses smooth? Sorting out the pros and cons and it is interesting to be that we differ in our preferences.
March 28, 2017
Answer: Textured vs Smooth? Smooth implants usually have thinner shells and move more freely in their pocket than their textured counterparts. Many plastic surgeons believe that the thinner shell allows smooth implants to feel more natural. Implants with smooth surfaces are less likely to ripple. Textured implants were designed to lower the risk of capsular contracture, but whether it achieves that is open to debate. Capsular contraction can occur no matter what type of implant is used. The textured implants may have a greater chance of leakage or deflation and may be associated with a very rare form of lymphoma called anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL). Currently, most plastic surgeons in the U.S. prefer smooth implants. You should discuss your concerns with your plastic surgeon, who should be certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery and ideally a member of the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAP). Robert Singer, MD FACS La Jolla, California
Helpful 2 people found this helpful
March 28, 2017
Answer: Textured vs Smooth? Smooth implants usually have thinner shells and move more freely in their pocket than their textured counterparts. Many plastic surgeons believe that the thinner shell allows smooth implants to feel more natural. Implants with smooth surfaces are less likely to ripple. Textured implants were designed to lower the risk of capsular contracture, but whether it achieves that is open to debate. Capsular contraction can occur no matter what type of implant is used. The textured implants may have a greater chance of leakage or deflation and may be associated with a very rare form of lymphoma called anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL). Currently, most plastic surgeons in the U.S. prefer smooth implants. You should discuss your concerns with your plastic surgeon, who should be certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery and ideally a member of the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAP). Robert Singer, MD FACS La Jolla, California
Helpful 2 people found this helpful
August 17, 2021
Answer: Text/SM There is a lot of debate in the US about this, but, imo, there is no doubt that txt implants DECREASE capsular contracture (CC) rates by 2/3--~10% for smooth, and ~3% for txt! Given that CC is the most common complication, and if I can decrease the rate by 2/3 just by changing the implant, I think it only makes sense to do so--for the patients' benefit. Why not use a simple change in implant to decrease the risk of something by 70%? There just seems to be no feasible argument to me. Bottoming-out is relatively common with smooth as well. I used to fix about 5-6 'bottomed-out' cases/yr when I used smooth; I think I've fixed a total of 3 since I started with txt implants about 10 yrs ago.Smooth implant advocates will tell you there is an increase in rippling, and that is false as well. I actually had more rippling complaints from smooth implant clients than txt implants--I believe that rippling is an issue when the implant is too big for the skin envelope and the breast tissue is very thin. If you take care to not stretch the breast tissue too much, and beware of skin envelope characteristics, the risk of rippling is minimized in both implants.There is a reason why, worldwide, 90% of people use txt implants--they are better, have a lower side-effect profile and give a longer lasting result, period.Best.
Helpful 3 people found this helpful
August 17, 2021
Answer: Text/SM There is a lot of debate in the US about this, but, imo, there is no doubt that txt implants DECREASE capsular contracture (CC) rates by 2/3--~10% for smooth, and ~3% for txt! Given that CC is the most common complication, and if I can decrease the rate by 2/3 just by changing the implant, I think it only makes sense to do so--for the patients' benefit. Why not use a simple change in implant to decrease the risk of something by 70%? There just seems to be no feasible argument to me. Bottoming-out is relatively common with smooth as well. I used to fix about 5-6 'bottomed-out' cases/yr when I used smooth; I think I've fixed a total of 3 since I started with txt implants about 10 yrs ago.Smooth implant advocates will tell you there is an increase in rippling, and that is false as well. I actually had more rippling complaints from smooth implant clients than txt implants--I believe that rippling is an issue when the implant is too big for the skin envelope and the breast tissue is very thin. If you take care to not stretch the breast tissue too much, and beware of skin envelope characteristics, the risk of rippling is minimized in both implants.There is a reason why, worldwide, 90% of people use txt implants--they are better, have a lower side-effect profile and give a longer lasting result, period.Best.
Helpful 3 people found this helpful