Advantages and Disadvantages of Breast Augmentation: Surgical Techniques, Outcomes and Future Directions

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
• Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
• Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
• Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
• Emerging · Emerging topic under active research

Abstract (original English)

Breast augmentation remains a highly sought-after cosmetic surgery, with various techniques available to enhance breast size using implants or fat transfer. This systematic review, spanning studies from 2003 to 2024 and adhering to PRISMA guidelines, evaluates the outcomes of different surgical approaches concerning scar quality, postoperative pain, patient satisfaction, and complications. The periareolar technique emerges as a favorable option, offering minimal postoperative pain, high patient satisfaction, and precise surgical control with subtle scarring. Transumbilical breast augmentation (TUBA) is noted for its scar-free approach, resulting in low pain and high satisfaction, though it requires specialized training and cannot use prefilled implants. The review highlights the varying complication rates across techniques: modern silicone implants, while safer than earlier injectable materials, still face risks such as rupture and capsular contracture. Autologous fat grafting is generally safer but can lead to issues like erythema and abscesses. The use of effective acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is linked to higher rates of seroma and infection compared to non-ADM procedures, although sterile human ADM shows a lower risk profile. The study underscores the importance of personalized surgical planning to optimize outcomes, as each technique offers distinct benefits and challenge

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.