This female patient came into our offices seeking a breast augmentation revision one year after she had undergone a breast augmentation procedure elsewhere. During her breast augmentation procedure, 375CC moderate profile saline implants were used. As you can see from the “Before” pictures, her breast implants had bottomed out, creating an unfortunate, un-aesthetically pleasing contour to her breast profile.
She desired a repositioning of the implants, with increased fullness to her upper breast area, or as it is also known, the upper pole area. Her breast augmentation also resulted in repositioned, upwardly-pointing nipples that she also wanted to correct.
During the breast augmentation revision procedure, her saline implants were re-positioned and filled to 500 CC through an inframammary incision in order to give her upper breast area the fullness that she desired. The pocket in which the implant was held was then internally tightened to correct the bottoming out of the implant.
After fully recovering from her breast augmentation revision, the patient reported that she experienced not only the fullness to her upper breast area that she desired, but that she also experienced a corrected centering of the nipple, with the added correction to the upward-facing aspect of her nipples. This is due to the proper repositioning of the implant as well as the internal tightening of the implant pocket.
Before her breast augmentation revision, her breast were C-cups, and afterwards, due to her desired increase to the upper breast region and subsequent increase in size from 375CC to 500CC, the patient’s breast are now D-cups.
She has reported that she is extremely happy with her breast augmentation revision and is very satisfied with all the corrections as evident in the “After” pictures.
The female patient has previously undergone a breast augmentation procedure in which 400 CC saline implants were inserted. Unfortunately, several years after that procedure, her implants began to experience severe bottoming out as well as lateral displacement. The lateral displacement was serious enough to cause her to complain that she often felt as though the implants were falling into her armpits (or as they are technically known, her axillae).
She wanted to not only correct the problems of bottoming out and lateral displacement, but she also wanted to slightly increase her breast size as well as switch her saline implants to silicone implants.
During the breast augmentation revision, her 400CC saline implants were replaced with 500CC high profile silicone gel implants and positioned in such a way to correct the bottoming out and lateral displacement that her previous implants were experiencing. The implant pocket within her breasts were internally tightened in order to discourage her implants from repositioning again.
As you can see from her “After” pictures, taken several months after the breast augmentation revision, the procedure corrected the repositioning problems of her previous breast augmentation procedure as well as creating the fuller and rounder breast profile that the patient desired, increasing her pre-breast augmentation revision C-cup breasts to a post-breast augmentation revision D-cup breasts.
The patient has reported that she is very satisfied with her breast augmentation revision procedure and is extremely happy with the corrections to the implant repositionings as well as her more voluptuous breast profile.
This female patient came to our offices seeking to correct problems stemming from her breast augmentation procedure in which 375CC moderate profile saline implants were used.
Unfortunately, the implants were not positioned correctly the first time around and resulted in a large space between her breasts, and therefore a lack of cleavage, which was her biggest complaint. Besides correcting her breast spacing and cleavage issues, she also desired a slight increase in the size of her breasts by switching out her 375CC moderate profile saline implants with 450CC moderate plus profile silicone implants.
During the breast augmentation revision procedure, her saline implants were switched out and replaced with silicone implants. In order to correct the spacing issue, an open capsulotomy was performed on her implant pockets so that implants would better stay in place after the breast augmentation revision.
As you can see from her “After” pictures, which were taken three months after her breast augmentation revision procedure, the space between her breasts has been narrowed, creating the cleavage that the patient desired. The switching of the saline implant to a slightly larger silicone implant gave the patient the rounder and fuller breast profile that she wanted. As is evident from the pictures, there is very minimal visible scarring from the procedure.
The patient has reported that she is extremely satisfied with the outcome of her breast revision augmentation.