Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Indications for Extra Full Projection Anatomical Cohesive Silicone Gel Implants in Cosmetic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery

Mario, Avelina I. MRCS, MD; Molina, Alexandra R. MRCS, MA (Cantab.); Malata, Charles M. FRCS (Plast.)

doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e318174333e
Breast Surgery

In 2003, a new extra full projection (EFP) anatomic cohesive silicone gel breast implant was introduced onto the European market. This review presents the early experience of a single surgeon with this new implant over a 29-month period. Between 2003 and 2006, the McGhan Style 410 EFP breast implants were inserted for highly selected indications. Twenty-eight patients received a total of 47 EFP implants. Their age range was 23 to 66 years (mean: 46 years). The implant was used in 6 primary and 7 revisional cosmetic breast augmentation patients. The series included 9 postmastectomy breast reconstructions. In further, 6 patients the implant was used to revise existing breast reconstructions. After a mean follow-up period of 31 months, there were no infections, malrotations, or significant capsular contractures and no patients have required revisional implant surgery. The novel implant was successfully used to address specific challenges in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery. These included large skin envelopes in breast augmentation patients declining mastopexy, complicated implant exchanges, and suboptimal prosthetic breast reconstructions. This prosthesis may prove a useful addition to the range of breast implants available, especially when there is an overlap of challenging esthetic problems.

From the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge.

Received for publication March 11, 2007; accepted February 19, 2008.

Presented at the 40th Congress of the European Society for Surgical Research (ESSR), Konya, Turkey, May 2005; 10th Congress of European Societies of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (ESPRAS), Vienna, September, 2005; and British Association of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (BAPRAS), Summer Meeting, Sheffield, June 2006

Disclaimer: The authors have no financial or other relationship to Inamed Aesthetics, the manufacturers of the implant studied. Inamed is one of many suppliers of implants used by the senior author.

Reprints: C. M. Malata, Consultant Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeon, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, CB2 2QQ. E-mail:

© 2008 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.