Head-to-Head Comparison of Silicone Implants: Video Insights from Gel-Shell Peel, Shell-Shell Interaction, and Gel Shell Deformation
Four manufacturers (Allergan, Mentor, Motiva, and Sientra) are FDA-approved for the distribution of breast implants, providing a range of options for surgeons and patients in both aesthetic and reconstructive procedures. With many different implant options, physicians often rely on arbitrary reasons for implant selection. Currently, there are limited studies directly comparing the gel-shell interface of the implants from each manufacturer. The goal of the study is to evaluate the interaction between the silicone gel and outer shell for each implant from the four manufacturers, primarily utilizing videography to determine which implant demonstrates superior performance.
Methods/Technique:
A bench study was completed using implants from each respective company. Two unopened, new implants were provided by each implant company and evaluated using multiple tests. Videography (time-lapse, slow motion) was employed to help illustrate the implant’s results during testing. The gel-shell peel test involved suspending a small section of a cut implant, allowing gravity and time to facilitate the dissociation of the silicone gel from the outer shell. The shell-shell interaction test consisted of rubbing the implant’s outer shell between two fingers until the shell surfaces fully interacted and adhered to one another. The gel-shell deformation test involved dropping the implant from a standardized height and capturing the impact in slow motion to observe the gel-shell adhesion properties and assess the implant's structural integrity under dynamic conditions.
Results/Complications:
Video results are the main qualitative data points related to this study and will be shown during the live presentation. The study evaluated eight total sixth generation implants from Allergan, Mentor, Motiva, and Sientra. Implants with a stronger gel-shell interface exhibited a longer gel-shell peel time, indicating enhanced adhesion between the gel and the shell. These implants also required more effort to achieve shell-shell interaction, reflecting greater structural integrity. Additionally, they were less prone to gel-shell deformation upon impact, suggesting improved durability and resistance to mechanical stress.
Conclusion:
This study demonstrates that videography (time-lapsed and slow-motion) is effective in examining sixth generation implants. Gel shell interface is in integral part of implant technology and impacts the overall function and aesthetics to the implant. Overall, the higher interaction between the implant’s gel and shell is an essential component to implant technology.