Comparative double blind clinical study on round versus shaped cohesive gel implants

Aesthetic Surgery Journal

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 530-536

  Friedman, Tal ^a   Davidovitch, Nadav ^a   Scheflan, Michael ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST AUGMENTATION; BREAST ENDOPROSTHESIS; BREAST REDUCTION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; ESTHETICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MEDICAL PHOTOGRAPHY; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURGEON; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33750438485     PISSN: 1090820X     EISSN: 1527330X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.asj.2006.08.004     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Hamas R. The postoperative shape of round and teardrop saline filled breast implants. Aesthetic Surg J 19 (1999) 369-374
2. Spear S., Bulan E., and Venturi M. Breast Augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 114 (2004) 73E-81E
3. Spear S., and Mardini S. Alternative filler materials and new implant designs: what's available and what's on the horizon?. Clin Plast Surg 28 (2001) 435-443
4. Tebbetts J. A system for breast implant selection based on patient tissue characteristics and implant-soft tissue dynamics. Plast Reconstr Surg 109 (2002) 1396-1409
5. Tebbetts J. Breast augmentation: the biodimensional approach. Texas Monthly 27 (1999) 133
6. Choosing Breast Augmentation (1998), McGhan Medical Corporation, Santa Barbara (CA) 6-7
7. Heden P., Jernbeck J., and Hober M. Breast augmentation with anatomical cohesive gel implants. Clin Plast Surg 28 (2001) 531-552
8. Brody G. The perfect breast: Is it attainable? Does it exist?. Plast Reconstr Surg 113 (2004) 1500-1503