Sientra makes great implants and was the first implant manufacturer in the USA to obtain FDA approval for their shaped cohesive silicone gel implants. They also sell their products only to American Board of Plastic Surgery-certified plastic surgeons in the USA, whereas the other two implant manufacturers will sell their implants to any licensed physician who wishes to perform breast augmentation, regardless of specialty training. AND, Sientra offers a 2-year capsular contracture "warranty." This is not a "new" company, as they have been manufacturing and selling implants worldwide for many years, and were the first company to be allowed to sell implants in the USA since the FDA restrictions of 1992 caused all but Mentor and McGhan (now Allergan) to go bankrupt or cease selling implants. So certainly a solid choice for implants, as are the other two companies' products.But, I question your central premise that a "natural" look is achieved by a shaped implant more commonly or better than by a smooth round cohesive gel implant by Sientra or either of the other two implant manufacturers. Since teardrop-shaped implants must have proper positioning and must stay in that position (sloped part up, rounded part down) to take advantage of their innate "natural" shape, by necessity they are textured so that the body's tissues can adhere to and maintain the proper position of the implants. Thus, teardrop implants cannot and do not move very much at all as the patient changes from a standing to a reclining position. Also, the teardrop implant remains teardrop-shaped when the patient is lying down, whereas the natural breast flattens out and assumes a round appearance. Shaped (form-stable) implants are also more costly than round smooth implants. The smooth round implant does just what a natural breast does: it is teardrop-shaped when the patient is upright, and flattens and drops slightly to the side when the patient reclines. Thus, the round implant is actually more "anatomic" than the teardrop, “gummy-bear,” or so-called anatomic implant.Some plastic surgeons believe that the “anatomic” or teardrop-shaped implant has a more natural look than the round implant, and much advertising and marketing has been used to promote “anatomic” implants to the public. These implants are perfectly good devices, but they are more expensive than the smooth, round implant, and whether or not it is truly more "anatomic" is questionable, and has actually been studied. In this study, actual women with smooth, round implants were compared to women with textured, teardrop-shaped implants. Mammograms were performed in upright and supine (lying-down) positions, and digital tracings computerized and compared. Both the round and teardrop-shaped implants had a sloped, teardrop shape when the women were upright. In fact, in upright patients, teardrop and round implants were indistinguishable on X-ray, because the soft, cohesive silicone gel round smooth implants became teardrop shaped themselves. But, when a woman is lying down, the natural non-augmented breast flattens, drops slightly to the side of the chest, and assumes a round shape, as does the round smooth implant. The teardrop-shaped implant stays teardrop-shaped and does not move at all to the side in the lying-down position, which makes this actually LESS anatomic than the round implant! I just thought you should know that before you are "sold" a (usually) higher-cost pair of implants for reasons that are not necessarily valid. Best wishes! Dr. Tholen