Find out more about this implant, which we consider to be a contribution to the advancement of medicine and to the market.

In 1984 SILIMED began to supply to Latin America mammary implants with a polyurethane foam coated surface from the United States.

As early as 1989, SILIMED began to manufacture mammary implants with a polyurethane foam coated surface; today it is the only company in this sector to produce this implant.

Polyurethane foam coated mammary implants are considered the most advanced in the world due to the advantages they offer. They are the mammary implants with the lowest rate of capsular contracture*, those that present the best aesthetic results, those considered the most natural, the most indicated for cases of breast reconstruction, those on which most clinical studies have been published, and they do not require post-operatory massage, as do the other implants.

Today SILIMED is present in over 60 countries, selling polyurethane foam coated mammary implants all across Latin America, Russia, Israel, Germany, Singapore, Portugal, Belgium, Turkey and Italy, among others. In some countries, however, such as the United States, polyurethane is not yet available, since the FDA register is still lacking.

*Capsular contracture is a phenomenon of unknown cause that is considered statistically as the most recurrent complication in silicone gel mammary implants.

This implant is indicated for breast augmentation, reconstitution or correction, in cases of unilateral or bilateral hypomastia, and breast reconstruction.

The implant is made of an envelope of silicone elastomer that is chemically and mechanically resistant, fine and soft, to which polyurethane foam adheres through a process of vulcanization which diminishes the risk of formation of fibrotic capsule between the polyurethane foam and the implant.

The envelope contains a defined volume of transparent and highly cohesive silicone gel whose shape, density and consistency resemble the human tissue corresponding to the area implanted.

SILIMED’s line of this implant presents a varied set of shapes and sizes that appear in the Catalogue of Products and which attend to the various needs of the patients, this being the result of years of investigation obtained among medical professionals worldwide.

For cases of breast reconstruction, in our polyurethane line we offer a group of products designed to help the surgeon during breast reconstruction procedures, these being the add-on mammary implants meant for filling the infraclavicular region or the region around the implant.

Were they banned by the FDA?

Polyurethane foam implants were never banned by the FDA. Their manufacturer left the market voluntarily when the polemic about the use of this implant began to be made public in the United States. Even so, the FDA itself declared in a communiqué published at the time that there was no reason for patients with these implants to remove them. The same announcement regretted that the preliminary results of the studies were made public before being officially published after analysis by the FDA, thereby creating an unnecessary climate of fear in the patients.

Do they cause cancer?

The idea that the TDA released by polyurethane might be cancerigenic has been dismissed even by the FDA in accordance with recent studies carried out, as shown in the latest announcement to the press made by the agency with regard to polyurethane foam coated implants.

Are they very expensive?

What does a slightly higher price represent if we consider the tranquility of the patient and more safety in ensuring good results?

According to world statistics, the incidence of capsular contracture with smooth implants is 50%, whereas with textured implants the figure stands at around 8% to 10%, while some authors claim that in the medium run this index of capsular contracture is similar to that of the smooth implant. With polyurethane implants these indices are about 1% in aesthetic operations and 4% in reparatory surgery.

Consequently, if the most probable cause is replacing implants due to the incidence of capsular contracture, it can be concluded that the higher initial cost while selecting the implant is justifiable, and that this becomes an advantage for the patient. The well-being of the patient must also be taken into consideration, as well as the possibility of avoiding new surgical interventions.