ATLANTA, GA — (Marketwire) — 06/06/12 — Dr. Thomas Lintner, a plastic surgeon in Atlanta, has recently announced the addition of a new volume-sizing system from breast implant manufacturer Mentor®. Designed to help patients looking for breast augmentation in Atlanta find the right size for their goals, the new Mentor® Volume Sizing System will be available at both of Dr. Lintner’s office locations in Marietta and Woodstock. He says he is excited about the new products because they offer patients a chance to get a feel for both the projection and the weight of silicone breast implants.
At his practice, Advanced Aesthetic Surgery, Dr. Lintner focuses on a wide variety of cosmetic procedures ranging from facelifts and BOTOX® Cosmetic to liposuction and mommy makeovers. Recent statistics show that, amongst patients, dissatisfaction with the size of breast implants chosen is as high as 37%[1]. He says offering the new Mentor® Volume Sizing System allows patients a more tangible look at the type of results they can expect from breast implants in Atlanta, which can ultimately improve their pre-operative decision and their aesthetic outcome. Dr. Lintner says the unique shape fits over the patient’s natural breast and is available in a number of volume options between 150cc and 775cc.
Equipped with the new sizers, Dr. Lintner says patients will also be able to improve and expedite the consultation process by providing a realistic preview of the breast size. He says the result is a much higher satisfaction rate amongst his patients because they now can make sizing decisions during the consult, rather than having to schedule a second nurse visit to size the breast using an older and less efficient method. “I am very confident in Mentor’s ability to continue making an exceptional product and I’m very glad to offer this option for sizing to our patients,” says Dr. Lintner.
While the Mentor® sizers are a beneficial tool for helping patients choose the proper size implant, Dr. Lintner says the most important indicator of a successful outcome is the plastic surgeon’s ability and experience in performing the breast augmentation procedure. He says the ultimate choice of size or implant style should be made in the operating room using the patient’s anatomy, sizers, chest dimensions and the board-certified surgeon’s judgment. As with any medical procedure, Dr. Lintner suggests patients conduct extensive research before settling on a practice for their treatment. Through the expertise and surgical advice of a skilled plastic surgeon, he says patients have the opportunity to achieve a proportionate, beautiful result that can enhance their appearance and self-confidence.
“I feel the new sizing system from Mentor will help communicate expectations between a prospective patient and myself and my staff. Clearer understanding of the weight and feel of any given size implant will help patients be happier with their post-surgical result,” says Dr. Lintner.
[1] “Saline-Filled Breast Implant Surgery: Making an Informed Decision” January 2004, Accessed 5/23/12
About Thomas B. Lintner, MD, FACS
An honors graduate of Georgetown University, Dr. Thomas Lintner earned his medical degree from Emory University School of Medicine, where he also completed his general surgery and plastic surgery residency programs. He is board-certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery, a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons, and a member of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, and several other professional organizations. Published in several articles and national journals of medicine and surgery, Dr. Lintner currently serves as an active member on staff at Wellstar Kennestone Hospital in the ER Services and Medical Staff Credentialing Committees.
Advanced Aesthetic Surgery has two locations, both reachable at (770) 771-5151: 711 Canton Road Suite 400 in Marietta, GA, and 120 N. Medical Parkway Suite 200 in Woodstock, GA. It can also be contacted online via the websites tomlintnermd.com, atlantamommymakeover.com, or the Advanced Aesthetic Surgery Facebook page.
Board certified Atlanta plastic surgeon, Dr. Deutsch, offers suggestions for people trying to choose between saline and silicone breast implants.
Atlanta, GA (PRWEB) May 30, 2012
In the 1990s, silicone implants were reported as harmful in the case that they ruptured within the breasts. as modern technology shifted into the 21st century and assessments were thoroughly pursued, data now confirm that silicone implants are no longer a safety hazard. Dr. mark Deutsch, board certified Atlanta plastic surgeon in Atlanta, Georgia, reports that while saline and silicone implants are both safe, the majority of his patients choose silicone over saline.
“Silicone implants are just as safe as saline implants,” says Dr. Deutsch. “The only difference between the two is form and texture. When choosing between saline and silicone, the decision is purely based on aesthetics. however, we are seeing favoritism towards silicone because it tends to produce a more natural appearance.”
Saline implants are made up of a saline solution whereas silicone implants are a gel that resembles fat; this is a big reason why more women prefer silicone over saline. “People typically prefer silicone implants because while they are more expensive than saline, they are thicker and create a more natural look. the end result? Confidence in most cases,” reports Dr. Deutsch.
Breast implants, or breast augmentations, are most commonly performed in women who either want a larger cup size or have lost shape and breast projection post-pregnancy. During the procedure, an incision is made either at the lower border of the areola or above the natural fold under the breast where the implant is inserted. the process is considered outpatient surgery and generally lasts an hour under anesthesia. the recovery period is one of the most appealing aspects of the surgery; while heavy lifting and exercising isn’t recommended until about 4 weeks following the surgery, everyday routines can be resumed once the patient feels comfortable and stops taking the prescription narcotics. Patients must wear a post-operative bra the first week and can shower about 2 days after the surgery.
Dr. Deutsch has in-depth consultations with his patients to make them fully aware of all benefits and risks of the surgery. He has encountered many patients who have misconceptions about the procedure, such as the belief that breast implants cause cancer. There is currently no correlation between breast implants and breast cancer and women should still receive their annual breast exams after the surgery. New mothers are still able to nurse after having the surgery and the implants generally last up to 15 years.
Perimeter Plastic Surgery offers the most up-to-date plastic surgery techniques with the most advanced technological equipment. If you want to learn more about Atlanta plastic surgery, visit the physical locations at 980 Johnson Ferry Rd. Ste. 880 in Atlanta, Georgia or 1267 Hwy 54 West, Suite 5300 in Fayetteville, Georgia. you can also call 770-461-4824 or visit the website: http://www.perimeterplasticsurgery.com
The 14 analysts offering 12-month price forecasts for Dow Chemical co have a median target of 38.00, with a high estimate of 49.00 and a low estimate of 32.00. the median estimate represents a +23.10% increase from the last price of 30.87.
The current consensus among 21 polled investment analysts is to Hold stock in Dow Chemical co. This rating has held steady since may, when it was unchanged from a Hold rating.
Analyst forecasts for current quarter earnings per share estimate are $0.70.
Analyst forecasts for current quarter sales estimate are share are $16.2B
This year marks the 50th anniversary of silicone breast implants.
But breast augmentation began long before the spring of 1962.
This Spring marks a plastic surgery milestone. It’s the 50th anniversary of silicone breast implants. Click through these photos and read the timeline for highlights involving scientific news, health issues, celebrities and more.
Shown here: Dolly Parton, an inspector looking at an implant, and “Real Housewife of Orange County” Alexis Bellino.
PHOTOS: GETTY IMAGES, AP, THE REGISTER; TEXT: MARILYN KALFUS, THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
Substances were injected into women’s chests, researchers say, since at least the late 1800s. they included paraffin, animal fat and industrial silicone.
The 1950s saw all sorts of materials transplanted, even glass balls and sponge implants. the latter shrank, becoming hard as baseballs.
Then, one day in the mid-20th century, after the advent of Playboy, the Barbie doll and high-profile celebrities like Marilyn Monroe (thought to have worn “falsies”) and Jayne Mansfield (considered natural), a plastic surgeon had an “aha” moment.
Dr. Frank Gerow of Houston squeezed a plastic transfusion bag filled with blood and realized if felt a lot like a woman’s breast. in 1961, he and Dr. Thomas Cronin developed the first silicone breast implant in collaboration with the Dow Corning Corp.
Here are highlights of reports since then:
See more in a slideshow here!
1962: Texas factory worker Timmie Jean Lindsey gets the first set of silicone breast implants after doctors propose that she be their first human subject. “I told them I’d rather have my ears fixed than to have new breasts,” the mother of six was quoted as saying. “And they said, well, they’d fix that too. so I said, OK.” Lindsey, now 80, went from a B to a C cup and made history.
1970s: New silicone implants are produced that are more “lifelike,” but they break more easily. Total removal is difficult or impossible. Also in this decade, a polyurethane foam covering for implants becomes popular to prevent capsular contracture – capsules of tightly woven collagen fibers created by the immune response to the presence of foreign objects – but the foam begins to disintegrate in the body almost immediately, making it difficult to remove.
1976: the Food and Drug Administration enacts the Medical Devices Amendment to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. the FDA now can approve the safety and effectiveness data of new medical devices. Silicone breast implants, on the market for almost 15 years by then, are “grandfathered” in.
1977: A Houston attorney wins the first lawsuit for a Cleveland woman who claims that her ruptured implants and subsequent operations caused pain and suffering. She gets a $170,000 settlement from Dow Corning.
1980s: Ralph Nader’s Public Citizen Health Research Group warns that silicone breast implants may cause cancer.
1982: the FDA proposes to classify silicone breast implants into a Class III category, requiring manufacturers to prove their safety.
1984: the systemic autoimmune disease of a woman in the San Francisco area is found by a jury to be caused by her silicone breast implants. She is awarded $211,000 in compensatory damages and $1.5 million in punitive damages. the evidence is sealed by a court order.
In the years that follow, there is litigation all over the country alleging that breast implants caused various serious diseases and ailments.
In the end, and despite millions of dollars in payments to plaintiffs in class-action lawsuits and jury trials, scientists say they can find no cause-and-effect relationship.
June 1988: Six years after the 1982 proposal, the FDA classifies breast implants as Class III.
December 1990: A program warning of silicone breast implant dangers runs on “Face to Face With Connie Chung.” Also, a congressional hearing is held on the safety of silicone breast implants.
January 1992: the FDA’s commissioner, Dr. David Kessler, calls for a voluntary moratorium on the distribution or implantation of silicone breast implants until the FDA and the advisory panel have an opportunity to consider newly available information.
March 1992: Dow Corning, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Bioplasty exit the silicone breast implant business. McGhan and Mentor still manufacture breast implants. Dow sets up a fund for further research into breast implant safety.
April 1992: Kessler lifts the moratorium on silicone breast implants, but the only women allowed to receive implant surgery are those undergoing breast reconstruction. the recipients must be part of a scientific protocol.
March 1994: A class action suit is finalized by manufacturers; Dow Corning is the largest contributor. the other contributors include Baxter, Bristol-Myers Squibb/MEC, and 3M. It’s the largest class action settlement in history. But the manufacturers claim there is no scientific evidence linking silicone breast implants with autoimmune diseases.
June 1994: A Mayo Clinic epidemiologic study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, finds no increased risk of connective-tissue disease and other disorders studied in women who had silicone implants.
1995: the American College of Rheumatology says there is “compelling” evidence that implants did not cause systemic disease.
May 1995: Dow Corning files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Dow is looking at 20,000 lawsuits, some with more than one plaintiff, and about 410,000 potential claims that have been filed in the settlement. the bankruptcy halts all litigation.
June 1995: the Harvard Nurses Epidemiologic Study is published in the New England Journal of Medicine. it finds no increased risk of connective-tissue disease in women with silicone implants.
December 1995: More than 20 studies and abstracts have come out in the U.S. and internationally, all failing to support a causal relationship between silicone implants and various autoimmune related illnesses.
August 1997: The New York Times says implant manufacturers have won 80 percent of cases against them. But a jury in the first class-action suit rules that Dow Chemical (which owns half of Dow Corning) deceived women by hiding safety information about the silicone in the implants.
September 1997: the Journal of the National Cancer Institute publishes a review of many medical studies that concludes breast implants do not cause breast cancer. the researchers describe evidence for linking implants to other diseases as “borderline.”
November 1998: Dow Corning files for bankruptcy reorganization, which includes a $3.2 billion, previously agreed-to settlement. People who filed claims are offered options: Those who want to cash out immediately and not file a disease claim will be paid $2,000. that can be combined with $5,000 for implant removal and $20,000 for a ruptured implant. Those who have already filed a disease claim will receive between $10,000 and $250,000.
June 1999: The Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, releases a 400-page report by an independent committee of 13 scientists. they conclude that although silicone breast implants may be responsible for problems including hardening or scarring of breast tissue, the implants do not cause any major diseases such as lupus or rheumatoid arthritis.
2002: Dolly Parton admits to the news media that she has breast implants. Through the years, many celebrities confirm getting them, too, including onetime Playboy Playmates and actresses Pamela Anderson and Jenny McCarthy; singer Victoria Beckham; TV personalities Denise Richards and Heidi Montag; and later, members of various casts of “The Real Housewives,” including Alexis Bellino, Vicki Gunvalson and Tamra Barney of Orange County (Barney recently had them removed) and Kim Zolciak of Atlanta.
2003: Mariel Hemingway talks about her experience with breast implants, saying the silicone leaked. “I think implants are bad news. I enjoyed them for about a year, then from ages 20 to 32, I was asking, ‘Why do I have these? I hate these.’”
October 2005: TV personality Sharon Osbourne admits to having had breast implants inserted earlier in the year. “I am a 34DD now and Ozzy loves them,” she said of her husband. She later swapped them out for more modest ones, and in 2011 said she had a complication in which one changed shape and leaked.
November 2006: the FDA allows silicone gel-filled breast implants back on the market but requires manufacturers to conduct follow-up studies to learn more about the long-term performance and safety of the devices. the FDA also states on its website: “Breast implants are not lifetime devices. the longer a woman has them, the more likely she is to have complications and need to have the implants removed or replaced. Women with breast implants will need to monitor their breasts for the rest of their lives.”
The site also says: “Studies to date do not indicate that silicone gel-filled breast implants cause breast cancer, reproductive problems, or connective tissue disease, such as rheumatoid arthritis. however, no study has been large enough or long enough to completely rule out these and other rare complications.
“FDA is working with the two manufacturers who make silicone gel-filled breast implants, Allergan and Mentor, to address the challenges in collecting follow-up data on the women who have received these implants.”
2010: Implants made with industrial-type silicone by French company PIP are banned. the implants were widely used across Europe and South America, and governments begin urging women to have them removed. (They are not sold in the U.S.)
March 2011: the FDA approves a new silicone-gel breast implant, making Sientra of Santa Barbara the third U.S. company to market the products, after Irvine-based Allergan and Johnson & Johnson’s Mentor unit.
May 2011: Casting in Miami for a new ’50s-era TV show, “Magic City,” is described as difficult because local women without breast implants are apparently in short supply.
Sources:The New York Times, the associated Press, Food and Drug Administration, Bloomberg Business News, BBC News Magazine, the Guardian, “Inventing Beauty” by Teresa Riordan, “Frontline,” American Academy of Neurology, Medscape.com, Twoop.com
5 Factors why Silicone Breast Implants Are Greater Than Saline …
Since of their much more natural feel and appearance, silicone breast implants are often advised for extremely thin ladies. These patients gene.com/url?sa=X&q=http://www.averagecost-of-breastimplants.com/5-factors-why-silicone-breast-implants-are-greater-than-saline/&ct=ga&cad=CAcQARgAIAEoBDAAOABA4KPv_ARIAlgAYgVwdC1CUg&cd=ipyNyvJ0v-I&usg=AFQjCNE327Zn_B6D0za7iYBqSUwVMs-bWw” title=”http://www.averagecost-of-breastimplants.com/5-factors-why-silicone-breast-implants-are-greater-than-saline/”>www.averagecost-of-breastimplants.com/5-factors-why-silicon…
Profile – courtneywhit25 – Zimbio
Breast augmentation in countries such as Thailand, South Africa, India, Brazil or Costa Rica can get you a savings from 60 up to 85% in ww.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://www.zimbio.com/member/courtneywhit25&ct=ga&cad=CAcQARgAIAEoBDAAOABA1qj0_ARIAlgAYgVwdC1CUg&cd=SbheCD1-8PY&usg=AFQjCNHpd9ewO5Bzk8mwcYYSkDmz5VmfAw” title=”http://www.zimbio.com/member/courtneywhit25″>www.zimbio.com/member/courtneywhit25
SCOTTSDALE, AZ, Apr 10, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) –Breast augmentation remains the most popular surgical cosmeticenhancement in the U.S., which is mirrored in the Scottsdale plasticsurgery practice of Dr. Steven Turkeltaub. he believes the extensive,exhaustive studies and research conducted over the years support thegeneral safety of both silicone and saline breast implants andrefutes the nebulous charges of self interest groups. furthermore, hestates that the strict requirements and thorough oversight by the FDAin their approval adds additional credence to their safety.
the recently publicized breast implant safety issue concerned theFrench breast implant manufacturer Poly Implant Prothese (PIP), whichwas caught substituting industrial grade silicone for some of theirimplants instead of using the far more expensive medical gradesilicone. Fortunately, none of their silicone breast implants wereused in the United States because the company failed to meet thenumerous and strict regulations and guidelines established by theFDA. As a board-certified Scottsdale plastic surgeon, Dr. Turkeltaubsays that a patient who has had a breast augmentation in the U.S.from a reputable board-certified plastic surgeon need not beconcerned about this issue.
Dr. Turkeltaub says he strongly believes in the safety of siliconegel implants for patients looking for breast augmentation inScottsdale, Phoenix, and Glendale. “Silicone gel breast implants,which are FDA approved, are probably the most studied medical deviceever. I feel extremely comfortable reassuring my patients of theirsafety and effectiveness and recommending them.” in fact, Dr.Turkeltaub says silicone breast implants in Scottsdale are the mostpopular choice of implant for patients at his practice, noting thatmore than 95% of his patients select the gel option for its naturallook, feel and durability. “My patients find that silicone feels morelike natural breast tissue, whereas saline implants can feel morelike a water balloon. when considering a procedure that can have sucha significant impact on the way a woman looks and feels about herbody, I’m not surprised a majority of women choose the silicone gelimplants.” the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAPS)confirms his observations, reporting that 62% of breast augmentationprocedures used silicone implants, whereas only 38% of cases usedsaline.
Whether patients are looking for silicone or saline implants for abreast enlargement in Scottsdale, Dr. Turkeltaub says consulting withan experienced and reputable board certified plastic surgery practiceis essential for having a much greater likelihood for achieving anaesthetically-pleasing outcome. he also stresses the importance ofseeking a board-certified plastic surgeon who is caring, easilyrelates with patients, and spends an appropriate amount of timediscussing all aspects of the procedure and answering theirquestions.
“Board certification with the American Board of Plastic Surgery iscritically important when considering a procedure such as breastaugmentation. many of my patients have told me that word-of-mouthfrom friends and acquaintances who are or have been patients of theplastic surgeon can be quite helpful.”
about Steven H. Turkeltaub, MD, PC
A graduate of the Six-Year Medical Program at Boston University andBoston University School of Medicine, Dr. Steven Turkeltaub completedhis general surgery residency at the University of Miami/JacksonMemorial Hospital and Northwestern Medical Center in Chicago, as wellas a plastic surgery residency at the University of MassachusettsMedical Center. he is a member of the American Society of PlasticSurgeons, the Arizona Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons,the Arizona Medical Association, and several other professionalsocieties. Board-certified in Plastic Surgery, Dr. Turkeltaub hasalso been published in several scholarly articles and textbooks onplastic surgery, in addition to a number of magazines and newspapers.
With two locations at 10290 N. 92nd Street Suite 207 in Scottsdale,AZ and 18275 N. 59th Avenue Bldg. E Suite 126 in Glendale, AZ, Dr.Turkeltaub’s practice, the Arizona Center for Aesthetic PlasticSurgery, can be reached at (480) 451-3000. he can also be contactedonline via the website turkeltaub.com, arizonabreast.com, orfacebook.com/drturkeltaub.
Contact: Rosemont Media Aaron Hurst Email Contact (858) 200-0044
SOURCE: Arizona Center for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
Charlotte breast augmentation remains the most popular of all cosmetic enhancement procedures even in the economy of today. The statistical trends still indicate that breast augmentation in Charlotte is, and will remain, a popular cosmetic enhancement choice for many women. The fact that this procedure has had such stunning results in terms of patient satisfaction, has made this a very common procedure for many surgeons in Charlotte to offer. Are you ready to learn more about this increasingly common surgical procedure?
The consultation with your Charlotte breast augmentation doctor should be a time in which you ask your most important questions. With that in mind you should become familiar with some of the most basic factors regarding breast enhancement. there are tremendous resources on the internet for deep information so your research should not simply be limited to viewing before and after photos of breast implants. as a start to your research I am providing an overview of some the most critical factors over which you have a decision to make in the process.
Charlotte breast augmentation doctors were approved to start using silicone breast implants after the FDA issued an approval in 2006. The controversy over the use of silicone has significantly diminished after 14 years of testing with patients from 1992 to 2006. Silicone has numerous advantages including the fact that they are more natural to the touch and create a fuller more natural looking breast. despite the fact that the costs of your overall procedure can increase by as much as one thousand dollars, Charlotte patients are commonly opting for this type of implant today.
of the four incision methods for placing your implant the most popular is the inframmary incision. With this method your Charlotte breast augmentation surgeon will make a small incision under the breast fold and then slide the implant either completely under the chest muscle, partially under, or over it. One of the distinct advantages of this method is the accuracy of placement which can help avoid assymetry of the breast implants. Additionally it is thought to be the method which is least likely to interfere with breast feeding. Perhaps the only real disadvantage is that this method leaves the most obvious scar, though it is easily concealed in any clothing.
One important way to research your procedure is through the use of before and after photos on the website of your Charlotte breast augmentation surgeon. Doctors will often display some of their best work on the internet in the form of before and after photos. This can be especially useful if they detail the age, weight, current breast size, and breast implant size of the patient. Importantly you should recognize that while before and after photos might be a gauge, they cannot be used as a rule. That is, even given all of these factors noted above one type of implant placed on one patient might look quite different on another.
Naturally one of the most important considerations in your surgery has to do with your choice in implant size. Charlotte breast augmentation doctors offer a brief time during their consultation to try on various sizers in the office to see what implant size might be right for you. I would also suggest that you take advantage of the breast implant sizers available today that you can try out at home. By experimenting with various sizes at home and on your own time you will soon get a feel for what size is right for you.
For many women today the choice for this fairly expensive procedure includes questions about financing options. Insurance companies generally do not cover this procedure if it is an elective procedure. Perhaps the most common method of financing the procedure is through popular credit cards which nearly all Charlotte breast augmentation doctors accept. Additional options include lines of credit through local banks and home equity loans. there are also specialized financing options through financial institutions offering medical loans though the interest rates on these may be a bit higher than a credit card. when you meet with your doctor they will be able to guide you through the various financing options available.
You should plan to meet with your surgeon as much as six months before you want the procedure to occur. after your first consultation with the doctor you will want to try on breast implant sizers for a few weeks to settle into your favorite size. many women report that they might change their mind several times about their desired implant size after wearing the sizers between the first and last consultation. your final consultation, just prior to the surgery will be focused on the final preparation and most importantly, your choice in breast implant size.
FRIDAY, March 9 (HealthDay News) — a new silicone-gel breast implant received conditional approval Friday from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The implant can be used for breast augmentation in women 22 and older and for breast tissue reconstruction at any age.
The newest implant, manufactured by Sientra of Santa Barbara, Calif., becomes the third approved for use in the United States, joining devices made by Allergan and Mentor. As a condition for approval, Sientra will continue studies on the implant’s long-term safety, effectiveness and risks of rare diseases, the FDA noted.
“Data on these and other approved silicone-gel filled breast implants continue to demonstrate a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness,” Dr. William Maisel, deputy director for science in the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said in an agency news release.
Silicone breast implants have been controversial for years, with critics contending that the devices can rupture and leak silicone, potentially causing a variety of health problems, including cancer and lupus.
Classified as medical devices, silicone implants are surgically placed under breast tissue or chest muscle to reconstruct or augment the breast.
In reconstruction, the implant usually replaces breast tissue removed because of cancer or trauma or breast tissue affected by a severe breast abnormality. another reason is to revise or improve results from a previous reconstruction surgery, according to the FDA.
Similarly, breast augmentation is used to increase breast size or to improve on previous augmentation surgery.
The FDA approval of Sientra’s implant is based on three years of data from clinical studies on nearly 1,800 patients. Complications included tightening of the area around the implant, re-operation, implant removal, uneven appearance and infection, according to the agency’s release.
The company’s additional long-term studies will include a seven-year follow-up of the current participants; a 10-year study of nearly 5,000 women to monitor long-term complications, including rheumatoid arthritis, breast and lung cancer; and five studies focusing on possible links between the new implant and connective tissue and neurological diseases, brain cancer, cervical/valvular cancer and lymphoma, the FDA said.
Reaction to the latest approval came swiftly.
Dr. John Oeltjen, an assistant professor of plastic surgery at the University of Miami School of Medicine, thinks the FDA decision is a good one.
“The implant from Sientra is like the implants from other companies already marketing implants,” he said. “So that’s not out of line.”
“In general, there are no problems with silicon gel implants,” he said. The advantage of silicon gel over saline implants is that the silicon has a more natural look and feel, he added, while saline implants can wrinkle, which can show through the skin.
However, Oeltjen said he would like to see the FDA also allow marketing of contoured implants, which are not round, but shaped more like a natural breast.
Dr. Jeffrey C. Salomon, a clinical professor of plastic surgery at Yale University School of Medicine, noted, “Sientra is a brand that has been used in Brazil for an extended length of time, and I doubt that there were concerns about cancer, otherwise the FDA would have not approved them.”
He added, “While the next generation of breast implants is the so-called form stable variety, those implants have not been released in the U.S. despite being used throughout the world for a few years.”
“The form stable implant does not develop capsular contracture, which is a response by the body to a foreign object and can result in pain and discomfort as the implant is squeezed by fibers created by the immune system,” he added. “And that is really the category of breast implant surgeons are anticipating the release of.”
Dr. Alan Matarasso, a plastic surgeon at Lenox Hill Hospital and Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Institute in new York City, said: “This [the FDA decision] is exciting information for patients because it offers another choice for women undergoing breast cancer reconstruction or cosmetic breast augmentation.”
Silicone gel implants had been banned in the United States for 14 years, until 2006 when the FDA approved the ones made by Allergan and Mentor for breast reconstructive surgery and for breast enlargement in women 22 and older.
But, when the ban was lifted, the FDA noted that there wasn’t a lot of data on adverse effects, including what the agency called “rare events” and “long-term performance.” In light of this, the agency required the manufacturers to do studies on the implants’ safety and performance after their approval.
Then last September, after a contentious two-day hearing, the FDA ruled that silicone implants were safe and could remain on the market. However, the agency said at the time that it would work with manufacturers of the devices approved for use in the United States to improve studies gauging the health of women who received the implants.
The FDA emphasized last year that silicone implants don’t last forever, with as many as half of women with such implants requiring removal within 10 years of the initial surgery. according to the agency, one in five women who receives silicone implants to increase the size of her breasts will need to have the devices removed within 10 years due to complications. And as many as half of women who receive implants for reconstruction after breast surgery will need them removed within the same time frame.
Common complications include: hardening of the area around the implant; the need for additional surgeries; and implant removal. other frequent problems include implant rupture, wrinkling, breast asymmetry, scarring, pain and infection, the FDA said.
The FDA recommends that women who get silicone implants: follow-up regularly with their doctor, which includes occasional MRIs to detect potential ruptures; pay attention to any changes and notify their health-care provider if they notice any unusual symptoms such as pain, asymmetry or swelling; and educate themselves on the signs and symptoms of complications.
“It’s important to remember that breast implants are not lifetime devices,” Maisel said. “Women should fully understand risks associated with breast implants before considering augmentation or reconstruction surgery, and recognize that long-term monitoring is essential.”
According to FDA estimates, 5 million to 10 million women worldwide have breast implants.
More information
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has more about breast implants.
The office of plastic surgeon Ignacio Sousa is so packed that women are lined up outside the door. College students in their 20s, housewives in their 40s, middle-class office workers: nearly all are fearful that their breast implants may be leaking.
Thousands of women worldwide are consulting their doctors about health concerns that have sprung up since December due to faulty silicone breast implants from now-defunct French company Poly Implant Prothese, or PIP.
In some cases, the implants filled with industrial-grade silicone have split open, prompting growing demand for their removal.
“It’s like a snowball,” said Sousa, who has been seeing dozens of patients every day since the news broke that French authorities recommended the implants be removed.
The scandal has hit beauty-obsessed Venezuela particularly hard. An estimated 16,000 Venezuelans have the implants, one of the highest figures among Latin American countries, along with much-larger Brazil, where about 20,000 women have PIP-made implants.
Breast-enlargement surgery is common in Venezuela and has grown more popular among middle-class women, thanks in part to low-interest loans offered by private clinics for the operations.
The PIP brand was used frequently until the implants were pulled from the market in 2010.
Like many of those affected in Venezuela, Sania Arroyo has struggled with the mounting medical bills. The 33-year-old bank employee and single mother managed to save about 20,000 bolívars, or $4,600, for surgery to replace the implants in January, scraping together nearly four times what she paid to have them inserted in 2007.
She suspected a problem with the implants when she felt a tingling pain under her left breast. An ultrasound exam confirmed one had ruptured.
She said the replacement implants feel more comfortable, but she’s still apprehensive.
“I feel so much better now, although I still have the fear something similar could happen again,” Arroyo said, holding a plastic case containing the ruptured implant and the yellowish silicone that leaked out.
PIP’s silicone gel is transparent, but doctors say the substance often turns yellow when it comes in contact with body tissues.
Arroyo is one of 495 Venezuelans suing companies that sold the implants, demanding payment of medical costs.
Venezuela’s government offered to remove the implants for free, but many women say they won’t take up the offer because they want new implants and the government won’t pay for them.
On a per-capita basis, Venezuela appears to lead Latin America in the number of breast implants. That’s no surprise in a country where beauty pageants are a source of national pride and some teenagers receive implants as birthday presents.
Middle-class women sometimes set aside large portions of their salaries for the surgery.
An estimated 35,000 to 40,000 undergo breast-enlargement surgeries in Venezuela each year, and doctors say the numbers have been rising.
“Terror has certainly gripped patients who have the implants, but I don’t believe the desire for breast-enlargement surgery is going to diminish,” said Gabriel Obayi, a surgeon who has been answering emails from women concerned about health risks.
Like most surgeons in Venezuela, Obayi recommends PIP implants eventually be removed but advises that surgery is not urgent in most cases.
Regardless of the brand, breast implants are known to break down over time and rupture in some cases.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned silicone-gel type implants in 1992 amid fears they might cause cancer, lupus and other diseases. But in 2006 the agency returned the implants to the U.S. market after most studies failed to find a link between the implants and disease.
The FDA began an investigation last year into a possible link between implants and a rare form of cancer, anaplastic large cell lymphoma. The agency said it had learned of about 60 cases of the disease worldwide among women with implants.
France’s Health Safety Agency has said the suspect PIP implants appear to be more rupture-prone than other types, but officials have not specified why.
French health authorities have said they don’t know enough about the health effects of the industrial-grade silicone in the faulty implants, and have recommended that women get them removed after the implants ruptured in more than 1,000 cases. The government has agreed to pay for the procedure.
French investigators say PIP sought to save money by using industrial silicone rather than the medical-grade variety.
Last week, French authorities filed preliminary charges against PIP’s founder, Jean-Claude Mas, who, according to his lawyer is under investigation for “involuntary injury.”
His company went into bankruptcy proceedings after the government in 2010 pulled the implants from the market.
Just recently, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) has released a statement saying the defective silicone breast implants made by PIP, a now bankrupt French company, did not reach the US. This means that only patients who received breast augmentation outside the country are the ones who should only be concerned with the products.
But unfortunately, the ASPS said that about 80 percent of PIP breast implants were exported to other countries including UK, Chile, Spain, Germany, Colombia, Venezuela, Argentina, and Brazil. for this reason, estimates suggest that 300,000 patients worldwide are affected by the substandard products.
Meanwhile, some reports show that PIP implants were sold by a Dutch-based company under the brand name “M” which was commonly used in Brazil. and with the growing international scandal, the biggest country in Latin America has recently banned the defective products.
Aside from a nationwide ban, Brazil’s health ministry also said the government is willing to pay the medical costs for the removal of PIP breast implants. This has also been the promise of French authority to the affected patients.
In fact, 39 women in Brazil have been entitled to receive implant removal surgery free of charge.
On the other hand, UK authority still insists that there is no reason to conduct a nationwide removal of PIP breast implants. such statement has appalled the public as some authorities directly said the government and clinics cannot foot the bill for about 40,000 patients with PIP implants, which are said to lack coating that prevents the gel filling from leaking out of the shell.
While Brazil is offering free implant removal surgery, the government said the coverage is only applicable for those with ruptured implants. and without any symptoms, a patient should foot the bill if she is concerned with the potential complications associated with PIP’s products.
“We are not offering free preventive surgeries,” one government official said.
Currently, the health ministry has no idea on how many PIP breast implants were imported and sold in Brazil. However, it has discovered that in December last year alone, the country imported about 34,631 implants, with 24,534 of these were sold.
a NURSE friend recently suggested I write about the epidemic of "young girls having boob jobs".
Sure enough, a decade after Dow Corning went bankrupt through billions of dollars worth of lawsuits from women who claimed silicone breast implants made them sick, boob jobs are back in fashion.
Perhaps inspired by the curvy stars of Mad Men, breast augmentation is one of the most popular cosmetic surgeries for young women, with Medicare claims reportedly up more than 50 per cent since 2005.
Yet, when I visited a private hospital in an affluent Sydney suburb recently, nurses there told me the real story was not breast enlargements but surgery being undertaken by young women to reshape their outer genitals. It is the fad of the "designer vagina".
They were privately horrified at the insecurity that drives women to have perfectly healthy genitalia cut and stitched into a shape that conforms to an unrealistic image presented in airbrushed pornography. They told of women as young as 19 who claimed they needed surgery to look good in tight bike pants.
One young woman came in with her boyfriend who told her he didn’t like "brown bits" where he thought "pink bits" should be. but the women and their boyfriends – and even some of their doctors – don’t know what "normal" genitals are supposed to look like. all they know is the porn fantasy.
"There is this perception that people’s genitalia are somehow abnormal because they don’t fit some imagined idea of normal which they get from a porn movie or magazine," says Dr Ted Weaver, of the Royal Australian new Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. the college has called for the practice of airbrushing genitalia in pornography to be banned because it causes terrible misconceptions about what the human body looks like.
And often when women complain to their GPs about irritation, itchiness and rashes it is caused by ingrown hairs and other side effects of the popular procedure of ripping out pubic hair every six weeks.
But labioplasty surgery to slice off the outer genitals – or "resculpting", as plastic surgeons prefer to call it – is a booming business, increasing by 500 per cent between 2002 and 2009, Weaver says.
Medicare payments for the procedures have more than doubled in the past decade to about 1200, costing the taxpayer at least $4000 a pop.
But women have to convince GPs there is a medical reason for the procedure to qualify for Medicare, so the actual figures are larger. Plastic surgeons are reporting a doubling every year in the number of women asking for genital surgery.
Genital "resculpting" has been ringing alarm bells in medical circles for some time. In July, Sydney gynaecologist Dr Rebecca Deans joined British colleagues to write a letter to the Medical Journal of Australia asking: "why are women referred for female genital cosmetic surgery?"
The average age of British women undergoing the procedures was 25. almost three quarters wanted surgery because of "embarrassment" about genital appearance, mentioning "disparaging comments by previous sexual partners", "harassment by other girls at school" or "concerns being flagged by the girls’ mothers".
What’s more, surgery rarely satisfied the woman, "with up to 80 per cent requiring further reconstructive surgery", according to one of Deans’ co-authors in the International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.
Melinda Tankard Reist’s new book Big Porn inc addresses the pressure the pornography industry puts on young women to provide boyfriends with the PSE (porn star experience).
"why are doctors cashing in on the body angst of 19-year-old kids?" she says.
The ubiquity of porn has brought us to the terrifying point where teenage boys find the bodies of real women distasteful. One survey of 400 teenagers, aged 14 to 17, by Britain’s Channel Four found their views of sex were influenced by pornography, with average consumption at 90 minutes a week. And it’s not the Playboy magazine soft porn of their parents’ generation, but "bestiality, group sex and lesbian intercourse".
When shown images of 10 breasts, boys at one high school in Norfolk found most attractive those that had been "surgically enhanced", the Guardian newspaper reports. And some regarded images of female genitalia covered with pubic hair disgusting.
So young women are mutilating their most intimate body parts to satisfy a false pornographic ideal. Female self-hatred is the final tragic manifestation of our sex-saturated culture.
<a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/girls-check-in-for-genital-mutilation/story-e6frezz0-1226149726288tag:news.google.com,2005:cluster=http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/girls-check-in-for-genital-mutilation/story-e6frezz0-1226149726288Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:14:26 GMT 00:00″>Girls check in for genital mutilation
This Spring marks a plastic surgery milestone. It’s the 50th anniversary of silicone breast implants. Click through these photos and read the timeline for highlights involving scientific news, health issues, celebrities and more.
