Contamination of the space between the capsule and the implants by micro- organisms, silicone oils, degradation products and gel impurities constitutes a major problem which potentates the risk of implants. Such problems include inflammation, infection, deposition of mineral debris, as well as certain autoimmune phenomena. These problems can be present when implants are in situ (in the body) and are often attributable to the implant. The logical expectation is that, upon removal of the implants, adverse effects will cease. This is an unjustifiably optimistic view. It is well documented from case histories that removal and or replacement of implants without exhaustive debridement of the prosthetic site leads to failure and post surgical complications. Plastic surgery procedure lead to favor speed and immediate cosmetic results. For these reasons, leaving or "reusing" tissue from an existing capsule may seem more "gratifying". However, adverse effects resulting from the practice are widespread but have not been well documented. Typically, patients who require removal of faulty implants and undergo immediate re- implantation in the same prosthetic site habitually relapse with the same problem which motivated the previous surgery; the most common example is exchange of implants and/or sectorizing or bisecting the capsule without removing it completely. |
- Home
- The PIP Scandal
- The Warnings ....
- Our PIP`s are TOXIC
- P.I.P Implants videos & photos what you don't see.
- Peer Reviewed Pip Literature
- Harley Medical Group aka Thmc aka THMG aka CORRUPT
- Opinions .
- NHS Recommendations VS The Truth.
- Breast Implants debate "10 years & counting
- Petitions., Surveys etc....
- Mas - Heritage The Story
- Court Cases
- Influence of pharmaceutical & Mhra
- MHRA corrupt....Unelected, Unbalanced and Unaccountable....
- Mhr ...........Who??????
- Uk Different to Other Countries Pip
- The So-Called Regulations ...Never Changing over Decades ...
Blais_capsule
Blais_capsule