Implant to Fat: A Breast Augmentation Technique Validated by BREAST-Q
Tahseen H., Fayek M., Emara D., Taha AA.
Case Report / Series with a reported sample of 3, published in Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
- 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
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Case Report / Series
- Journal
- Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open (2020)
- Reported sample size
- 3
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 33133909
- PMCID
- PMC7571938
- DOI
- 10.1097/gox.0000000000002859
- Citations
- 4
Abstract (original English)
Implant-based breast augmentation is the number one cosmetic procedure performed in the United States. However, it is associated with relatively high revision rates, reaching up to 24% at 4 years. This case series presents our experience in implant explantation with simultaneous breast augmentation using fat. Methods This case series was conducted by the authors in Cairo, Egypt, during the period from January 2018 to June 2019. Following a detailed data collection, careful physical examination was done. Implant-to fat conversion was done for all cases. None of the cases needed >1 session of fat injection following the implant removal. Size of the implants removed ranged from 200 -350 cm 3 (average of 310). Volume of fat injected ranged from 300 to 550 ml (average of 430). Patients' satisfaction was evaluated using the BREAST-Q questionnaire. Results Twenty patients were included, with a mean age of presentation of 33.1 years (range, 26 -42 years; SD, 5.3). Mean body mass index was 26.9 kg/m2 (range, 24 -30; SD, 1.9). Implant complications were as follows: capsular contracture (10cases), implant migration (3 cases), breast asymmetry (3 cases), poor aesthetic outcome (3 cases), and palpable implant (1 case). Overall patient's satisfaction was evaluated by the BREAST-Q 1-year following surgery. The overall satisfaction score was 3.8, where a score of 4 indicates very satisfied and
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.
Evidence level
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.