Posts Tagged ‘recycled fat risks’

Breast augmentation risks comes from a trend to use recycled fat. Taking liposuctioned fat from the thighs or buttocks, and using it for breast augmentation. This procedure was condemned in the 1990’s for good reason. Now it is being looked at with a way to enlarge breast without using implants.

Vanity is Expensive

This procedure is more expensive than implants, and does not guarantee positive results. That is mainly because only a certain portion of the fat will survive, and then it will fluctuate depending on weight. If after the procedure the patient looses weight than the work is undone.

The real expense is in the dangers that have a way of showing up well after the procedure. The doctor’s skill is paramount in this technique. If he is not well versed in the procedure their can be cysts, masses, nodules, and scaring. The other problem is that too little injected fat survives the transplant.

Real Problem

The real problem is that not enough is known about this procedure. The techniques for harvesting, refining and placing fat is not really very advanced. The red flag for most people should be that the plastic surgery society reversed its former position. They did this by reviewing very limited research on fat grafting to the breast. Augmentation for purely vanity issues makes this reversal an issue of ethics. The dilemma is that this task force’s statement is for plastic surgeons to proceed with caution.  

Just because it is a more natural choice than implants does not make it natural. Neither is it a particularly inviting choice. Vanity can take precedence over prudence.

Fear not

This is considered a two for one procedure; trade your saddle bags for a cup size larger. This is a real trade that can actually look good at first glance. But it is not for everyone, the big drop in the thighs or butt size is temporary. Without self-regulation this approach shows the stark differences between medical intervention, and lifestyle change.

This procedure is a balancing act. More volume in the chest area is not worth the doubts that this procedure brings with it.

Considerations

A baseline mammogram for a woman considering breast augmentation (or reduction) is a must, said Dr. Emily F. Conant, a radiology professor and the chief of breast imaging at the University of Pennsylvania Medical Center.

Dr. Stephen F. Sener, a professor of surgery at the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, wrote in an e-mail message: “I’ve seen enough injections of fat after mastectomies to tell you that fat necrosis is a real problem.” It can result in a “palpable mass” that needs to be biopsied to establish malignancy or infection, wrote Dr. Sener, the former president of the American Cancer Society.

Perceived Risks

Doctors have experimented with augmenting breasts with fat before, the Wall Street Journal reports, but that led to “hard lumps or calcifications” because the fat “died” once it was grafted. A decade ago, it was discovered that fat has stem cells in it that are similar to the stem cells in bone marrow? The new fat put into breast tissue is sent to a lab prior to insertion, so that the stem cells within can be fortified.

There are major, as yet-unexplored risks, the Journal notes. “Some doctors worry the fat, when reinjected in the breast, could calcify and interfere with mammographic cancer screening. Another concern is that fat injections could increase the risk of breast cancer, because certain anticancer drugs work in postmenopausal women by inhibiting the production of estrogen, a hormone in fat tissue.”

What most patients don’t realize is that they are going through two procedures. Each one presents a risk.  All these are issues to consider when vanity is the issue. Most of theses considerations are overlooked when patients are focused on the endgame, a so-called better appearance.

The real endgame is not going to be known for years to come.  Right now what are called long term studies, are really shorter than what is needed for real assurances. The number of women tracked would and should be considered too small for comfort.

Weighing In

At the October meeting of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Dr. Khouri presented a long-term study that suggested liposuctioned fat was now a “viable alternative to breast implants.” It tracked 50 women, ages 17 to 63, for an average follow-up of 3.5 years.  (For weeks, participants wore a cumbersome bra-like tissue expander at night that was created by Dr. Khouri to create scaffolding for their fat.) The study, which Dr. Khouri plans to publish in a peer-reviewed journal, found that the procedure does not impede the reading of mammograms and that on average, 85 percent of transplanted fat survived to give patients natural-feeling larger breasts.

Dr. Coleman, who was part of the task force, said, “It’s easy to kill fat,” and worried that Johnny-come-latelies won’t be meticulous. “Suddenly everyone is claiming to have 10 years of experience.”