The monobloc hydrogel breast implant, experiences and ideas

The monobloc hydrogel breast implant, experiences and ideas This study is focused on the properties of the monobloc hydrogel (MH) breast implant, which has been around for more than 30 years, and to see how it behaves with regard to health complaints as sometimes seen in some patients who had received silicone gel (SG) breast implants. Patients responded to a questionnaire examining their experience with breast implants. Three groups were included. First, the control group ( n = 34) of women without breast implants. Second, a C group of women ( n = 42) who began and remained on the MH implant. Third, the B group of women who had their silicone gel implant replaced by the MH implant. In the B1 subgroup ( n = 22), a capsulectomy was also performed. In the B2 subgroup ( n = 13), the replacement was carried out without a capsulectomy. The C group behaved very much like the control group. The women of the B group experienced an improvement of their complaints and the improvement was even better after a capsulectomy. The only difference between the MH and SG implants is the content of the implant. The satisfaction of women with MH implants is generally high and not or hardly associated with health complaints. In women with SG implants and health complaints, these complaints can be relieved by replacement of the implants by MH implants. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png European Journal of Plastic Surgery Springer Journals

The monobloc hydrogel breast implant, experiences and ideas

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/the-monobloc-hydrogel-breast-implant-experiences-and-ideas-ZsTTwSX2cB
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by Springer-Verlag
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Plastic Surgery
ISSN
0930-343X
eISSN
1435-0130
D.O.I.
10.1007/s00238-011-0591-0
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This study is focused on the properties of the monobloc hydrogel (MH) breast implant, which has been around for more than 30 years, and to see how it behaves with regard to health complaints as sometimes seen in some patients who had received silicone gel (SG) breast implants. Patients responded to a questionnaire examining their experience with breast implants. Three groups were included. First, the control group ( n = 34) of women without breast implants. Second, a C group of women ( n = 42) who began and remained on the MH implant. Third, the B group of women who had their silicone gel implant replaced by the MH implant. In the B1 subgroup ( n = 22), a capsulectomy was also performed. In the B2 subgroup ( n = 13), the replacement was carried out without a capsulectomy. The C group behaved very much like the control group. The women of the B group experienced an improvement of their complaints and the improvement was even better after a capsulectomy. The only difference between the MH and SG implants is the content of the implant. The satisfaction of women with MH implants is generally high and not or hardly associated with health complaints. In women with SG implants and health complaints, these complaints can be relieved by replacement of the implants by MH implants.

Journal

European Journal of Plastic SurgerySpringer Journals

Published: Mar 1, 2012

References

  • Carboxy-methyl cellulose hydrogels used to fill breast implants: 15 years of experience
    Arion, H
  • The immunopathology of siliconosis
    Shanklin, DR; Smalley, DL

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off