Breast Augmentation Surgery: How Do We Do It? Results of a Joint Survey from European Association of Societies of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current perceptions, preferences, and practice of plastic surgeons in Europe regarding breast implant surgery after the controversy on macrotextured implants and BIA-ALCL and the voluntary recall of all biocell implants.

METHODS

A survey comprising 15 questions about implant selection and postoperative routines associated with breast augmentation was sent to all society members of the EASAPS.

RESULTS

Out of 1473 correspondents, 416 completed the survey with response rate being 28.2%. Countries with less than ten respondents were not included in the analysis. A total of 359 respondents (24.4%) were included in the analysis. Twenty-one respondents (5.8%) had a clinical experience < 5 years, 43 (12%) had 5-10 years' experience, and 295 (82.2%) had > 10 years' experience. Regarding the type of implant, only 6.1% would use a macrotextured implant. Fourteen per cent of surgeons would recommend to change a biocell implant in any case, even without symptoms or problems (rupture, seroma, and capsular contracture), 99.7% would send the capsule for histopathological study (99.7%), 98.9% would perform bilateral implant replacement in case of a unilateral problem of rupture, contracture, or seroma, and 80.8% of respondents considered capsulectomy as a technique for managing capsular contracture degree III/IV.

CONCLUSIONS

The main conclusion is the heterogenicity of answers and practice, due to the lack of guidelines and scientific evidence on breast implants. Although 22 (6.1%) respondents would use a macrotextured implant (either round or anatomic), 71.6% of respondents considered that there is not enough information for removing macrotextured implants from the market and that they should be allowed to be used unrestrictedly or under close surveillance of the regulatory agencies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .