Comprehensive reference of 78 clinical terms — implant types, shapes, profiles, surfaces, brands, surgical techniques, complications, and regulations. Each term cross-links to its reference page.
Processed donor tissue used as a structural support material in breast surgery — particularly in revision procedures and reconstruction. Used to reinforce tissue planes, address contour irregularities, or provide additional coverage. Not commonly used in routine primary augmentation but valuable in complex revision cases.
Reference page →Teardrop-shaped breast implant designed to mimic natural breast slope — fuller below the nipple, tapered above. Asymmetric (has defined top and bottom orientation). Trade-off: natural appearance vs rotation risk. Typically textured to minimize rotation. Approximately 15-20% of global placements.
Reference page →Implant displacement that occurs when the pectoralis major muscle contracts — visible during chest exercises, push-ups, or arm movements. Implant moves with the muscle, then returns to normal at rest. Most pronounced with submuscular placement; reduced with dual-plane; absent with subglandular.
Reference page →Incision along the lower border of the areola for implant access. Minimally visible scar but limits implant size and may affect nipple sensation. Less commonly used than inframammary fold incision in modern practice.
Reference page →Incision in the armpit (axilla) for implant insertion through the chest. Avoids any breast scar but limits surgical visualization. Not preferred for textured implants or large pockets. Less commonly used in modern practice.
Reference page →Standard system for grading capsular contracture severity. Grade I: capsule normal, breast soft. Grade II: capsule slightly firm, breast appears normal. Grade III: capsule firm, breast distorted. Grade IV: capsule hard, breast distorted with pain. Grades III-IV typically warrant revision.
Reference page →Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma. Rare cancer of the immune system arising in the scar tissue capsule around textured breast implants — particularly macrotextured BIOCELL surfaces. Not breast cancer; not caused by silicone gel. Highly treatable when caught early — over 95% cure rate for early-stage disease.
Reference page →Allergan's macrotextured implant surface, dominant from 2000-2018. Recalled worldwide July 2019 due to elevated BIA-ALCL risk (approximately 1 in 2,000-3,000 lifetime). Patients with existing BIOCELL implants do not require automatic explant but should monitor for symptoms.
Reference page →Microscopic bacterial colonization on implant surfaces. Suspected mechanism for capsular contracture development through chronic low-grade immune stimulation. Modern surgical practice uses antimicrobial irrigation and Keller funnel insertion to reduce biofilm formation risk.
Reference page →Lightweight breast implant brand using microsphere technology — hollow microspheres distributed through the silicone gel reduce implant weight by approximately 30% while maintaining equivalent volume. Manufactured by G&G Biotechnology. Best fit: athletes, larger-volume implants, long-term shape preservation.
Reference page →Gradual descent of the implant below the natural inframammary fold position — the lower pole of the implant 'sinks' below where it should sit, with the nipple appearing high relative to the implant. More common with larger implants, high-projection profiles, and thin overlying tissue. May require revision with capsulorrhaphy or fold reconstruction.
Reference page →Patient-reported systemic symptom complex (fatigue, brain fog, joint pain, autoimmune-type symptoms) that some patients attribute to their breast implants. Not currently a formal medical diagnosis. Modern practice acknowledges patient symptom experience and supports autonomy in explant decisions while recommending thorough medical workup.
Reference page →The thin layer of scar tissue that the body forms around any breast implant — a normal physiological response. Most capsules remain soft and asymptomatic. Capsular contracture is when this normally-thin layer becomes thickened and tight.
Reference page →Thickening and tightening of the scar tissue capsule around a breast implant. Modern incidence approximately 2-6% over 10 years. Severity classified by Baker grades. Treatment ranges from observation to surgical revision (capsulectomy + new implant).
Reference page →Surgical removal of the scar tissue capsule around a breast implant. Three approaches: partial (abnormal portions only), total (entire capsule in pieces), en bloc (capsule + implant intact as single unit). Different approaches indicated for different clinical scenarios.
Reference page →Surgical cutting of the capsule to release tension without removing it. Lower recurrence than capsulectomy for severe contracture but acceptable for mild cases. Less commonly performed in modern revision practice — capsulectomy preferred for Baker III-IV.
Reference page →Conformité Européenne — European regulatory approval indicating a medical device meets EU safety, health, and environmental requirements. Required for breast implant sales in the European Union. Equivalent to FDA approval in the USA but with different regulatory framework.
Reference page →Measurement from the sternum (breastbone) to the lateral chest wall — the anatomic foundation that determines maximum implant width. Implants cannot exceed chest base width without producing visible lateral edges. The single most important measurement in implant size selection.
Reference page →Silicone gel formulated with sufficient cross-linking to maintain shape if the implant shell is breached — does not flow freely like older non-cohesive silicone gel. Cohesiveness exists on a spectrum: moderately cohesive (most modern silicone), highly cohesive ('gummy bear' / form-stable). Modern silicone gel implants are at minimum moderately cohesive.
Reference page →Polytech's anatomical (teardrop) implant product line with optimized gel cohesiveness for shape stability. Combined with polyurethane coating for rotation immunity. Common in European breast reconstruction and primary anatomical augmentation cases.
Reference page →Implant placement technique developed by John Tebbetts (2001). Upper portion remains submuscular (under pectoralis muscle for edge coverage); lower portion released to allow natural breast tissue drape over the lower implant. Three Tebbetts types based on extent of release. Modern default for primary augmentation.
Reference page →Surgical technique removing implant and surrounding scar tissue capsule together as a single intact unit — without opening the capsule. Specifically indicated for: BIA-ALCL diagnosis or BIOCELL concern, suspected silicone rupture with extracapsular spread, patient request for personal reassurance.
Reference page →Hybrid implant concept (primarily Motiva Ergonomix) — appears round when patient stands upright but redistributes gel to anatomical-like shape when patient lies down. Combines round implant rotation immunity with natural lying-down appearance.
Reference page →Removal of breast implants without replacement. Common indications: BII concerns, BIOCELL/BIA-ALCL prevention, aesthetic preference change, lifestyle simplification. Often combined with concurrent or staged mastopexy due to skin stretching from prior implants.
Reference page →Silicone gel rupture where the gel has spread beyond the scar tissue capsule into surrounding tissue (breast parenchyma, muscle, lymph nodes). More complex than intracapsular rupture; treatment may include en bloc capsulectomy and removal of silicone-contaminated tissue.
Reference page →Senior surgical credential awarded by the American College of Surgeons. Requires rigorous evaluation of training, experience, ethics, and ongoing education. Independently verifiable at facs.org.
Reference page →United States Food and Drug Administration. The US regulatory authority for medical devices including breast implants. FDA approval required for sale in the USA. Mentor, Allergan/Natrelle, and Sientra are FDA-approved silicone gel breast implants in the USA. Other major brands (Motiva, Polytech, Sebbin, Nagor) are not currently FDA-approved.
Reference page →Fellow, European Board of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery. Examination-based European credential for plastic surgery. Independent of national licensing. Verifiable at ebopras.eu.
Reference page →Same as 'capsule' — the scar tissue layer that forms around any breast implant. Normal physiological response; capsular contracture is the abnormal version where this layer becomes thickened and tight.
Reference page →Implant that maintains its three-dimensional shape regardless of patient position or gentle pressure — typically achieved through highly cohesive ('gummy bear') silicone gel. Most relevant for anatomical implants where shape consistency matters; less relevant for round implants where shape is uniform regardless.
Reference page →Standard classification of tuberous breast severity. Type I: mild lower medial constriction. Type II: moderate lower medial + lateral constriction. Type III: severe entire lower pole constriction with areolar herniation. Type IV: very severe with minimal breast tissue. Guides surgical correction approach.
Reference page →Marketing term for highly cohesive silicone gel implants — gel sufficiently cross-linked to hold shape if shell is breached, similar to cut gummy bear candy. Medically more accurately termed form-stable cohesive gel. Trade-off: rupture safety + shape stability vs slightly firmer feel.
Reference page →Collection of blood within tissue. Post-operative hematoma around an implant is uncommon (1-3%) but can occur. Modern surgical technique (careful hemostasis, drains when indicated) reduces risk. Treatment: surgical evacuation if significant.
Reference page →Implant profile with maximum projection and minimum width within standard profile range. For same volume, narrower and more projected than moderate options. Best for narrow chest bases (11-12 cm) and patients prioritizing visible cleavage and upper pole fullness.
Reference page →Incision in the natural fold under the breast for implant access. Most common incision in modern primary augmentation — provides direct access for any implant size, well-hidden scar, allows precise pocket dissection. Typically 4-5 cm length.
Reference page →The natural anatomic fold where the lower breast meets the chest wall. Important reference for incision placement, implant pocket dimensions, and assessment of breast position relative to nipple-areola complex (key indicator for whether mastopexy is needed).
Reference page →Allergan/Natrelle's modern silicone gel implant product family — replaces the recalled BIOCELL macrotextured products. Multiple cohesion levels (SoftTouch, ResponsiveSiltex, TruForm 1/2/3) and primarily smooth surface options. FDA-approved.
Reference page →Silicone gel rupture where the gel remains contained within the scar tissue capsule. Most common rupture pattern with modern cohesive gel implants. Treatment: standard implant exchange. Differs from extracapsular rupture (more complex treatment).
Reference page →International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery — leading global academic organization for aesthetic plastic surgery. Members from 100+ countries. Biennial World Congress is the premier international plastic surgery scientific meeting.
Reference page →Joint Commission International — international gold standard for hospital quality and patient safety. JCI-accredited hospitals globally meet the same quality benchmarks as elite US hospitals. Independently audited every 3 years. For international patients, JCI accreditation provides reassurance regardless of country.
Reference page →Sterile funnel-shaped device used for no-touch implant insertion — minimizes contact between implant and skin/tissue, reducing biofilm contamination risk. Standard tool in modern breast implant surgery for capsular contracture risk reduction.
Reference page →Implant profile with minimum projection and maximum width for given volume — flatter, wider geometry. Best for wide chest bases (15+ cm), athletic body types, and conservative aesthetic preferences. Approximately 8-12% of global placements.
Reference page →Implant surface with coarse pore size (200-700 microns). Largely withdrawn from market following 2019 BIOCELL recall due to elevated BIA-ALCL risk. Smaller niche of macrotextured products remains in some markets.
Reference page →Breast lift surgery — repositions sagging breast tissue and nipple-areola complex to a higher position. Can be performed alone (mastopexy only) or combined with implants (augmentation + mastopexy). Different scar patterns: periareolar, vertical (lollipop), inverted-T (Wise pattern).
Reference page →Mentor's silicone gel implant product family. Multiple cohesion levels (Standard, Xtra). Established product line with FDA approval since 2006 and decades of clinical follow-up data.
Reference page →Mentor's anatomical (teardrop) implant product line. FDA-approved in 2013. Highly cohesive gel for shape stability; Siltex microtextured surface to reduce rotation. One of the few FDA-approved anatomical implants in the USA.
Reference page →Implant surface with fine pore size (50-100 microns) — between smooth and macrotextured. Encourages tissue adherence (essential for anatomical implants) without the elevated BIA-ALCL risk of macrotextured. Mentor Siltex and Motiva SilkSurface are major microtextured products.
Reference page →Implant profile with balanced projection and width — middle of standard profile range. Slightly less projection than moderate-plus, slightly more width. Suited to average chest dimensions (13-14 cm). Conservative default for primary augmentation.
Reference page →Most common single implant profile in modern practice — approximately 35-40% of global placements. Optimal balance of projection and width for average-to-narrower chest dimensions (12-13 cm). Slightly more projection than moderate, slightly less width.
Reference page →Costa Rica-based implant brand (Establishment Labs). Distinctive technology features: SmoothSilk surface, ProgressiveGel multi-cohesive gel, Ergonomix hybrid shape, optional Q Inside RFID microchip. CE mark, MHRA, widely available internationally; FDA trial in progress (USA).
Reference page →UK-headquartered implant brand owned by GC Aesthetics. Substantial UK and European market presence. NagorGel silicone gel and NagorTex microtextured surface. UK MHRA approved; not FDA-approved (USA).
Reference page →Allergan's breast implant product brand — now owned by AbbVie since 2020 acquisition. Inspira product family of modern smooth and microtextured silicone gel implants. FDA-approved. The recalled BIOCELL macrotextured products were removed from market in 2019.
Reference page →Anatomic relationship between the nipple-areola complex and the inframammary fold — the key indicator for whether augmentation alone or augmentation+mastopexy is appropriate. Nipple at/above fold pointing forward: augmentation alone. Nipple below fold or pointing down: mastopexy needed.
Reference page →Anatomic measurement of overlying breast tissue thickness — measured at the upper pole. Determines suitability for subglandular vs submuscular placement. Less than 2 cm: submuscular/dual-plane preferred. 2-3 cm: borderline. 3+ cm: subglandular acceptable. 4+ cm: subglandular excellent fit.
Reference page →German implant manufacturer (POLYTECH Health & Aesthetics GmbH). Dominant manufacturer of polyurethane-coated breast implants globally. Strong European market presence. CE mark, MHRA, TGA approved; not FDA-approved (USA).
Reference page →Implant surface with polyurethane foam coating that encourages strong tissue ingrowth. Essentially zero rotation in anatomical shapes; very low capsular contracture rates (~1-2%). Polytech is the dominant manufacturer.
Reference page →Breast sagging — measured by position of nipple-areola complex relative to inframammary fold. Mild ptosis: nipple at/slightly below fold. Moderate ptosis: nipple clearly below fold pointing slightly down. Severe ptosis: nipple far below fold pointing significantly down. Determines appropriate surgical approach.
Reference page →Motiva's multi-layer gel formulation — different cohesiveness levels in different parts of the implant (typically more cohesive at edges, less cohesive in center). Marketed as combining natural feel with shape stability.
Reference page →Motiva's optional embedded RFID microchip technology — passive, encrypted chip embedded in the implant for non-invasive identification of brand, model, serial number, and implantation date through external scanner. Useful for emergency identification and routine surveillance.
Reference page →Implant turning within its pocket — relevant for anatomical (teardrop) implants where rotation creates visible asymmetry. Round implants: rotation aesthetically irrelevant. Modern microtextured anatomical: ~1-3% rotation rate. Polyurethane-coated anatomical: <0.5% rotation rate.
Reference page →Visible folds or wave patterns in the implant edge through the overlying skin. More common with: thin overlying tissue, saline implants, subglandular placement, larger implants. Less common with: cohesive silicone gel, submuscular/dual-plane placement, adequate tissue thickness.
Reference page →Symmetric breast implant with equal volume distribution above/below/sides. Approximately 80-85% of global placements. Compatible with all profiles and surfaces. Rotation aesthetically irrelevant (round looks round in any orientation).
Reference page →Failure of the implant shell. Saline rupture: immediately obvious deflation. Silicone gel rupture: often silent (intracapsular containment) — requires imaging surveillance to detect. Modern cohesive gel rupture less consequential than older non-cohesive due to gel containment.
Reference page →Breast implant with silicone shell filled with sterile saline (salt water). Filled in operating room to specific volume. Advantages: immediate rupture detection (no MRI surveillance), lower cost. Disadvantages: firmer feel, more rippling. Modern share approximately 5% of global placements.
Reference page →French implant manufacturer (Laboratoires Sebbin). Substantial European market presence in France, Spain, Italy, Belgium. Multiple gel cohesion levels and surface options. CE mark; not FDA-approved (USA).
Reference page →Collection of fluid (lymphatic + serum) within tissue. Acute post-operative seroma (within first weeks) is common and usually resolves. Late-onset seroma (1+ years post-op) is the cardinal warning sign for BIA-ALCL evaluation — particularly with BIOCELL macrotextured implants.
Reference page →Cohesive silicone-based filler material in modern breast implants. The dominant implant filler globally — over 95% of placements. Modern fifth-generation silicone gel has substantial safety record. Multiple cohesion levels available.
Reference page →Motiva's 3D-imprinted fine surface texture — at the boundary between smooth and microtextured. Pore size approximately 30-50 microns (smaller than traditional Siltex microtexturing). Marketed as combining smooth-implant safety profile with microtextured tissue-adherence benefits.
Reference page →Mentor's microtextured surface — created by negative imprinting against foam mold. Pore size approximately 50-100 microns. Established microtextured surface with substantial clinical follow-up data. Not subject to 2019 macrotextured recall.
Reference page →Polished, untextured implant surface. Lowest BIA-ALCL risk among current options. Modern shell technology has narrowed historical capsular contracture concerns. Standard choice for round implants in modern practice. Not appropriate for anatomical implants (rotation risk).
Reference page →Implant positioned under the deep pectoralis fascia but above the muscle itself. Specialty placement between subglandular and submuscular. Subtle advantages over subglandular; less commonly used than dual-plane in modern practice.
Reference page →Implant positioned over the pectoralis muscle, directly under breast tissue. Best for patients with substantial overlying tissue (3+ cm pinch), athletes (no animation), and faster-recovery priorities. Approximately 10-15% of modern primary augmentation.
Reference page →Implant positioned under the pectoralis major muscle. Maximum coverage of implant edges — best for thin patients (under 2 cm pinch). Lower capsular contracture rates. Trade-off: animation deformity during muscle contraction.
Reference page →Three variations of dual-plane placement based on extent of muscle release. Type 1: minimal release (essentially submuscular with slight modification). Type 2: moderate release (modern default). Type 3: maximum release (for ptosis or constricted lower pole, including tuberous breast).
Reference page →Generic term for implants with surface texturing (microtextured, macrotextured, or polyurethane-coated). Texture mechanism varies but generally encourages tissue adherence — relevant for anatomical implants and historically for capsular contracture reduction.
Reference page →Transumbilical Breast Augmentation — incision through the navel for implant insertion. Saline implants only (silicone gel cannot be inserted through this approach). Rarely used in modern practice.
Reference page →Congenital developmental condition characterized by constricted lower pole, narrow base, areolar herniation, and enlarged areolar diameter. Affects approximately 5-7% of women. Severity classified by Grolleau system (Types I-IV). Correction involves comprehensive multi-component technique.
Reference page →Visible volume in the upper half of the breast (between nipple and clavicle). Round implants produce visible upper pole fullness; anatomical implants produce more natural slope. Patient preference between fuller appearance vs natural slope drives implant shape and profile selection.
Reference page →Send 5-angle photographs via WhatsApp. Personal assessment within 24 hours.
WhatsApp +90 544 850 72 32 →