Televisions, radios, newspapers, but above all the Internet today represent the most effective and widespread source of information, especially on topics unrelated to “traditional culture”, such as cosmetic surgery.
But this does not mean that everyone is well informed about everything.
On the contrary, the many reports disseminated through the various media often lend themselves to controversial interpretations, sometimes inaccurate at the origin, sometimes completely wrong.
This generates false information, urban legends and real myths to debunk.
Let’s try to shed light on one of the most widespread topics in the industry: breast augmentation, or the surgical procedure to rebuild the breast.
Myth # 1 – Prosthetics must be removed every 10 years (FALSE!)
The prostheses in use in the 1970s, in 50% of the cases, were broken up between 8 and 10 years after implantation. The latest generation prostheses are equipped with a certainly longer-lasting casing, even if they cannot be considered indestructible. Today it is therefore easier to record breaks in the prosthetic shell after 15 or 20 years. However, it is likely that exposure to trauma or the patient’s particular biochemistry may facilitate implant rupture, hence the invitation to a careful clinical surveillance that allows early detection of an eventual injury.
Myth # 2 – Round prostheses are better than anatomical ones (FALSE!)
The vertical position and the compression action of the pectoral muscle practically transform a round prosthesis into an anatomical one, so that the profile differences between the two prostheses “in vivo” are really minimal. It makes a big difference instead that the anatomical prostheses are proposed with differently shaped bases, allowing them to be better adapted to the shape of the patient’s chest, with far more natural results and without having to give up a generous neckline in rebuilding the breast.
Myth # 3 – The areola incision causes loss of sensation around the nipple (FALSE!)
In fact, this incision interrupts less than 30% of the sensitive nerve endings that reach the areola. The sensitivity of the nipple-areola complex, certainly diminished in the first months after the operation, is still destined to return to levels almost identical to the pre-operative ones.
Myth # 4 – Breast repair compromises the possibility of breastfeeding (FALSE!)
In the field of breast augmentation the areola incision affects only a small part of the glandular tissue (approximately 15-20% of the total), so the ability to breastfeed is more than adequately preserved compared to what is necessary.
Myth # 5 – Submuscular prostheses are incompatible with sporting activity (FALSE!)
Surely the technique under the breastplate should not be recommended to an Olympic champion javelin thrower, but this has nothing to do with the sport practiced by the common lovers of physical activity. The trauma suffered by the pectoral muscles during breast augmentation repairs within a few weeks and the re-trained muscle, after only 40-60 days, will not fail to give the same sports performance as in the pre-operative period.
Myth # 6 – Additive Mastoplasty prevents regular oncological prophylaxis and mammograms (FALSE!)
Mammography can be regularly performed also by breast implant carriers; in fact there are particular methods to prevent the prosthesis from shielding portions of the mammary gland, making the examination less effective. It is also true that mammography represents a traumatic event for breast implants and that this would contraindicate their execution.
Fortunately, the magnetic resonance of the breast has now entered common practice and, besides being absolutely NOT traumatic and less invasive – thanks to the absence of exposure to X-rays, it represents an extremely more effective diagnostic tool than traditional mammography. In fact, Magnetic Resonance is able to give detailed information also on the state of the prosthesis, as well as on that of the mammary gland.
Myth # 7 – The adipose transplant represents a valid alternative to breast augmentation with prostheses (FALSE!)
The effectiveness of lipofilling is closely related to the extent of the territory to be infiltrated and therefore a small breast can benefit from a modest increase in volume through a single adipose transplant procedure. This is a method whose effectiveness is inevitably linked to a multisession treatment and, logically, also to the availability of adipose tissue in adequate quantities in the patient.
For these reasons, lipofilling proves to be extremely effective and versatile more in correcting the shape than the volume of the breast and in fact it finds useful use in all those congenital dysmorphisms (tuberous sinuses, asymmetries, etc.) and / or acquired (surgical outcomes, etc. .), which prostheses alone can never adequately correct.