Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 272

1.

Patient-reported satisfaction and health-related quality of life following breast reconstruction: a comparison of shaped cohesive gel and round cohesive gel implant recipients.

Macadam SA, Ho AL, Lennox PA, Pusic AL.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Mar;131(3):431-41. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31827c6d55.

PMID:
23142936
2.

Patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life following breast reconstruction: patient-reported outcomes among saline and silicone implant recipients.

Macadam SA, Ho AL, Cook EF Jr, Lennox PA, Pusic AL.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Mar;125(3):761-71. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181cb5cf8.

PMID:
20009795
3.

Cohesive silicone gel breast implants in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery.

Brown MH, Shenker R, Silver SA.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005 Sep;116(3):768-79; discussion 780-1.

PMID:
16141814
4.
5.

Algorithm and techniques for using Sientra's highly cohesive shaped silicone gel implants in primary and revision breast reconstruction.

Nahabedian MY.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014 Jul;134(1 Suppl):28S-37S. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000351.

PMID:
25057746
6.

Soft cohesive silicone gel breast prostheses: a comparative prospective study of aesthetic results versus lower cohesivity silicone gel prostheses.

Panettiere P, Marchetti L, Accorsi D.

J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60(5):482-9. Epub 2006 Sep 6.

PMID:
17399656
7.

Prospective study comparing two brands of cohesive gel breast implants with anatomic shape: 5-year follow-up evaluation.

Niechajev I, Jurell G, Lohjelm L.

Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2007 Nov-Dec;31(6):697-710.

PMID:
17653683
8.

Allergan Style 410 Implants for Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective Study in Efficacy, Safety, and Symmetry.

Unger JG, Carreras JM, Nagarkar P, Jeong HS, Carpenter W.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Sep;138(3):548-55. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002429.

PMID:
27127834
9.

Style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implant core study results at 3 years.

Bengtson BP, Van Natta BW, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Maxwell GP; Style 410 U.S. Core Clinical Study Group.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007 Dec;120(7 Suppl 1):40S-48S.

PMID:
18090813
10.

Shaped versus Round Implants in Breast Reconstruction: A Multi-Institutional Comparison of Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Khavanin N, Clemens MW, Pusic AL, Fine NA, Hamill JB, Kim HM, Qi J, Wilkins EG, Kim JYS.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 May;139(5):1063-1070. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003238.

PMID:
28445350
11.

Nine-Year Core Study Data for Sientra's FDA-Approved Round and Shaped Implants with High-Strength Cohesive Silicone Gel.

Stevens WG, Calobrace MB, Harrington J, Alizadeh K, Zeidler KR, d'Incelli RC.

Aesthet Surg J. 2016 Apr;36(4):404-16. doi: 10.1093/asj/sjw015.

PMID:
26961987
12.

Form stability of the Style 410 anatomically shaped cohesive silicone gel-filled breast implant in subglandular breast augmentation evaluated with magnetic resonance imaging.

Weum S, de Weerd L, Kristiansen B.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jan;127(1):409-13. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f95aba.

PMID:
21200237
13.

Eight-year follow-up data from the U.S. clinical trial for Sientra's FDA-approved round and shaped implants with high-strength cohesive silicone gel.

Stevens WG, Harrington J, Alizadeh K, Broadway D, Zeidler K, Godinez TB.

Aesthet Surg J. 2015 May;35 Suppl 1:S3-10. doi: 10.1093/asj/sjv020.

PMID:
25948657
14.

Mentor Contour Profile Gel implants: clinical outcomes at 6 years.

Hammond DC, Migliori MM, Caplin DA, Garcia ME, Phillips CA.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012 Jun;129(6):1381-91. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824ecbf0.

PMID:
22327894
15.

Which breast is the best? Successful autologous or alloplastic breast reconstruction: patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes.

Eltahir Y, Werners LL, Dreise MM, Zeijlmans van Emmichoven IA, Werker PM, de Bock GH.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Jan;135(1):43-50. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000804.

PMID:
25539295
16.

Immediate breast reconstruction using biodimensional anatomical permanent expander implants: a prospective analysis of outcome and patient satisfaction.

Gui GP, Tan SM, Faliakou EC, Choy C, A'Hern R, Ward A.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 Jan;111(1):125-38; discussion 139-40.

PMID:
12496573
17.

No differences in aesthetic outcome or patient satisfaction between anatomically shaped and round expandable implants in bilateral breast reconstructions: a randomized study.

Gahm J, Edsander-Nord A, Jurell G, Wickman M.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Nov;126(5):1419-27. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ef8b01.

PMID:
20639801
18.

Breast implant stability in the subfascial plane and the new shaped silicone gel breast implants.

Sampaio Góes JC.

Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2010 Feb;34(1):23-28. doi: 10.1007/s00266-009-9429-6.

PMID:
19936826
19.

Primary breast augmentation clinical trial outcomes stratified by surgical incision, anatomical placement and implant device type.

Namnoum JD, Largent J, Kaplan HM, Oefelein MG, Brown MH.

J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2013 Sep;66(9):1165-72. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2013.04.046. Epub 2013 May 9. Review.

PMID:
23664574
20.

Comparison of Allergan, Mentor, and Sientra Contoured Cohesive Gel Breast Implants: A Single Surgeon's 10-Year Experience.

Doren EL, Pierpont YN, Shivers SC, Berger LH.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Nov;136(5):957-66. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001675.

PMID:
26505700

Supplemental Content

Support Center