Expert Consensus on the Use of a New Bioengineered, Cell-Friendly, Smooth Surface Breast Implant

dc.contributorSistema FMUSP-HC: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP) e Hospital das Clínicas da FMUSP
dc.contributor.authorSFORZA, Marcos
dc.contributor.authorHAMMOND, Dennis C.
dc.contributor.authorBOTTI, Giovanni
dc.contributor.authorHEDEN, Per
dc.contributor.authorQUIROS, Manuel Chacon
dc.contributor.authorMUNHOZ, Alexandre Mendonca
dc.contributor.authorKINNEY, Brian M.
dc.contributor.authorCORDUFF, Niamh
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-30T13:42:43Z
dc.date.available2019-05-30T13:42:43Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractBackground Although general guidelines are available for established silicone gel breast implants, the unique characteristics of the latest Motiva implants warrant specific guidelines. Objectives This study aimed to generate consensus recommendations and summarize expert-based advice to better understand current surgical practices and to establish guidelines for surgeons transitioning from other implant devices to the Motiva implants. Methods A survey was compiled by 12 plastic surgeon experts in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery and 1 biotechnology scientist, and distributed to 36 plastic surgeons to establish a consensus on the use of these devices. Surgical techniques, complication rates, and implant selection were among the topics discussed. Results The experts agreed on 3 core principles regarding the use of Motiva Round and Ergonomix implants. Firstly, the dissected pocket needs to be close fitting and steps must be taken to prevent expansion of the pocket. Secondly, implant selection must be individualized. Finally, surgical planning and technique must be carefully considered. When questioned about problems they had ecountered, 84.6% of the experts agreed that they experienced fewer overall complications and 76.9% confirmed reduced capsular contracture rates with these devices. Overall, 84.6% of the experts favored selecting Motiva Ergonomix implants over Round implants to achieve a more natural look. In addition, 92.3% of the experts agreed that Motiva implants, due to their innovative technology, reduce the risk of anaplastic large-cell lymphoma. Conclusions This international consensus of leading practitioners will assist plastic surgeons with patient selection, preoperative planning, and surgical technique. These recommendations are designed to optimize surgical outcomes, resulting in lower overall complication rates, more natural-looking breasts, and highly satisfied patients.eng
dc.description.indexMEDLINEeng
dc.description.sponsorshipEstablishment Labs (Alajuela, Costa Rica)
dc.identifier.citationAESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL, v.39, suppl.3, p.S95-S102, 2019
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/asj/sjz054
dc.identifier.eissn1527-330X
dc.identifier.issn1090-820X
dc.identifier.urihttps://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/31875
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherOXFORD UNIV PRESS INCeng
dc.relation.ispartofAesthetic Surgery Journal
dc.rightsrestrictedAccesseng
dc.rights.holderCopyright OXFORD UNIV PRESS INCeng
dc.subject.wosSurgeryeng
dc.titleExpert Consensus on the Use of a New Bioengineered, Cell-Friendly, Smooth Surface Breast Implanteng
dc.typearticleeng
dc.type.categoryoriginal articleeng
dc.type.versionpublishedVersioneng
dspace.entity.typePublication
hcfmusp.affiliation.countryInglaterra
hcfmusp.affiliation.countryEstados Unidos
hcfmusp.affiliation.countryisogb
hcfmusp.affiliation.countryisous
hcfmusp.author.externalSFORZA, Marcos:Dolan Pk Hosp, Plast Surg, Bromsgrove, England; Royal Coll Surgeons England, London, England
hcfmusp.author.externalHAMMOND, Dennis C.:Michigan State Univ, Spectrum Hlth, Plast & Reconstruct Surg, Plast Surg, Grand Rapids, MI USA
hcfmusp.author.externalKINNEY, Brian M.:Univ Southern Calif, Div Plast Surg, Keck Sch Med, Beverly Hills, CA USA
hcfmusp.citation.scopus42
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcALEXANDRE MENDONCA MUNHOZ
hcfmusp.description.beginpageS95
hcfmusp.description.endpageS102
hcfmusp.description.issuesuppl 3
hcfmusp.description.volume39
hcfmusp.origemWOS
hcfmusp.origem.pubmed30958549
hcfmusp.origem.scopus2-s2.0-85064489263
hcfmusp.origem.wosWOS:000466714800001
hcfmusp.publisher.cityCARYeng
hcfmusp.publisher.countryUSAeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceQuiros MC, 2019, AESTHET SURG J, V39, P495, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjy196eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceDolores W, 2004, J AUTOIMMUN, V23, P81, DOI 10.1016/j.jaut.2004.03.005eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceJames GA, 2019, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V43, P490, DOI 10.1007/s00266-018-1234-7eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceJones P, 2018, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V142, P837, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004801eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKadin ME, 2017, BLOOD, V130eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLeberfinger AN, 2017, JAMA SURG, V152, P1161, DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2017.4026eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLoch-Wilkinson A, 2017, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V140, P645, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003654eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMaxwell GP, 2017, GLAND SURG, V6, P148, DOI 10.21037/gs.2016.11.09eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMunhoz AM, 2017, CASE REP PLAST SURG, V4, P99, DOI 10.1080/23320885.2017.1407658eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSforza M, 2016, J SURG OPEN ACCESS, V2, DOI [10.16966/2470-0991.e107, DOI 10.16966/2470-0991.E107]eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSforza M., 2018, J SURG OPEN ACCESS, V4, DOI [10.16966/2470-0991.176, DOI 10.16966/2470-0991.176]eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSforza M, 2018, AESTHET SURG J, V38, pS62, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjx150eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSforza M, 2016, AESTHET SURG J, V36, P886, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjw060eng
hcfmusp.scopus.lastupdate2024-05-10
relation.isAuthorOfPublication6f507ada-b0be-4c50-bd94-1f0116c9184c
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery6f507ada-b0be-4c50-bd94-1f0116c9184c
Arquivos
Pacote Original
Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Nome:
art_SFORZA_Expert_Consensus_on_the_Use_of_a_New_2019.PDF
Tamanho:
3.13 MB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descrição:
publishedVersion (English)