Tell your doctor if you have received any other botulinum toxin product in the last 4 months; have received injections of botulinum toxin such as Myobloc®, Dysport®, or Xeomin® in the past (tell your doctor exactly which product you received); have recently received an antibiotic by injection; take muscle relaxants; take an allergy or cold medicine; take a sleep medicine; take aspirin-like products or blood thinners.
In 1988, twenty-six years after the 1962 introduction of breast implants filled with silicone gel, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigated breast implant failures and the subsequent complications, and re-classified breast implant devices as Class III medical devices, and required from manufacturers the documentary data substantiating the safety and efficacy of their breast implant devices. In 1992, the FDA placed silicone-gel breast implants in moratorium in the U.S., because there was “inadequate information to demonstrate that breast implants were safe and effective”. Nonetheless, medical access to silicone-gel breast implant devices continued for clinical studies of post-mastectomy breast reconstruction, the correction of congenital deformities, and the replacement of ruptured silicone-gel implants. The FDA required from the manufacturers the clinical trial data, and permitted their providing breast implants to the breast augmentation patients for the statistical studies required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. In mid–1992, the FDA approved an adjunct study protocol for silicone-gel filled implants for breast reconstruction patients, and for revision-surgery patients. Also in 1992, the Dow Corning Corporation, a silicone products and breast implant manufacturer, announced the discontinuation of five implant-grade silicones, but would continue producing 45 other, medical-grade, silicone materials—three years later, in 1995, the Dow Corning Corporation went bankrupt when it faced large class action lawsuits claiming a variety of illnesses.
Fat transfer breast augmentation has a few important limitations. First, fat transfer is typically limited to approximately one cup size increase in breast size. Second, the transferred fat may be absorbed again by the body. Third, it is more expensive because of the extra time involved in harvesting and processing donor fat as well as possible need for a special vacuum bra device. This option is best reserved for women who desire a modest increase in size without using an implant.
The woman wanting a lift is usually slightly different. She had breasts she was happy with before, she had loving kids who she may or may not have breastfed, exercised and had a good life. They come wanting to restore the youthful breast they once they had(or better), they hate that it is slightly more deflated than before and it's slightly more south then they'd like. The formal name of this operation is "Mastopexy" and that's why you hear terms like "Mastopexy augmentation" because often in order to restore the youthfulness of the breast you not only need to reposition the nipple/areolar complex "up" with a mastopexy, you also need to provide some additional volume with an implant, hence augmentation as well. The discussion with implant also is entirely different discussion all together, but this highlights the primary difference in the reduction and a lift.
Health insurance does not cover rhinoplasty expenses unless you have a structural impairment such as a deviated septum. If your rhinoplasty is only being done for cosmetic reasons, expect to pay the fees out of pocket. If you have a breathing defect or if your nose has suffered a recent trauma, your insurance will likely cover the procedure. With that in mind, you should still always check before going in for surgery to ensure you won’t receive any surprise bills.
There are four general types of breast implants, defined by their filler material: saline solution, silicone gel, structured and composite filler. The saline implant has an elastomer silicone shell filled with sterile saline solution during surgery; the silicone implant has an elastomer silicone shell pre-filled with viscous silicone gel; structured implants use nested elastomer silicone shells and two saline filled lumen; and the alternative composition implants featured miscellaneous fillers, such as soy oil, polypropylene string, etc. Composite implants are typically not recommended for use anymore and, in fact, their use is banned in the United States and Europe due to associated health risks and complications.
the first technological developments were a thinner-gauge device-shell, and a filler gel of low-cohesion silicone, which improved the functionality and the verisimilitude (size, appearance, and texture) of the silicone-gel breast implant. Yet, in clinical practice, second-generation breast implants proved fragile, and suffered greater incidences of shell rupture, and of filler leakage ("silicone-gel bleed") through the intact device shell. The consequent, increased incidence-rates of medical complications (e.g. capsular contracture) precipitated faulty-product, class action-lawsuits, by the U.S. government, against the Dow Corning Corporation, and other manufacturers of breast prostheses.
The Summary of Safety and Effectiveness for each of the FDA-approved saline- and silicone gel filled breast implants details safety information known at the time of FDA approval. As the FDA learns of new safety information, it requires companies to update their product labeling. The most current safety information about saline- and silicone gel-filled breast implants can be found in the labeling.
The plastic surgical emplacement of breast implant devices, either for breast reconstruction or for aesthetic purpose, presents the same health risks common to surgery, such as adverse reaction to anesthesia, hematoma (post-operative bleeding), late hematoma (post-operative bleeding after 6 months or more), seroma (fluid accumulation), incision-site breakdown (wound infection). Complications specific to breast augmentation include breast pain, altered sensation, impeded breast-feeding function, visible wrinkling, asymmetry, thinning of the breast tissue, and symmastia, the “bread loafing” of the bust that interrupts the natural plane between the breasts. Specific treatments for the complications of indwelling breast implants—capsular contracture and capsular rupture—are periodic MRI monitoring and physical examinations. Furthermore, complications and re-operations related to the implantation surgery, and to tissue expanders (implant place-holders during surgery) can cause unfavorable scarring in approximately 6–7 per cent of the patients.  Statistically, 20 per cent of women who underwent cosmetic implantation, and 50 per cent of women who underwent breast reconstruction implantation, required their explantation at the 10-year mark.
In the early 1990s, the national health ministries of the listed countries reviewed the pertinent studies for causal links among silicone-gel breast implants and systemic and auto-immune diseases. The collective conclusion is that there is no evidence establishing a causal connection between the implantation of silicone breast implants and either type of disease. The Danish study Long-term Health Status of Danish Women with Silicone Breast Implants (2004) reported that women who had breast implants for an average of 19 years were no more likely to report an excessive number of rheumatic disease symptoms than would the women of the control group. The follow-up study Mortality Rates Among Augmentation Mammoplasty Patients: An Update (2006) reported a decreased standardized mortality ratio and an increased risk of lung cancer death among breast implant patients, than among patients for other types of plastic surgery; the mortality rate differences were attributed to tobacco smoking. The study Mortality Among Canadian Women with Cosmetic Breast Implants (2006), about some 25,000 women with breast implants, reported a 43 per cent lower rate of breast cancer among them than among the general populace, and a lower-than-average risk of cancer.
Functional breast-feeding difficulties arise if the surgeon cut the milk ducts or the major nerves innervating the breast, or if the milk glands were otherwise damaged. Milk duct and nerve damage are more common if the incisions cut tissue near the nipple. The milk glands are most likely to be affected by subglandular implants (under the gland), and by large-sized breast implants, which pinch the lactiferous ducts and impede milk flow. Small-sized breast implants, and submuscular implantation, cause fewer breast-function problems; however, it is impossible to predict whether a woman who undergoes breast augmentation will be able to successfully breast feed since some women are able to breast-feed after periareolar incisions and subglandular placement and some are not able to after augmentation using submuscular and other types of surgical incisions.
Hello and thanks for your post and questions. It seems that you would potentially be a fantastic candidate to have a breast reduction and lift using the Bellesoma technique with NO vertical scar! With this technique you should be able to reach a smaller, but perky and proportional breast size that fits your frame along with achieving upper pole fullness. You've provided great information - the only thing that would be more helpful in order to give you the best advice about your options would be an in-person exam.
Spend as much time as you can on researching possible surgeons for the job. You should look at the work they’ve done on other patients, ask for a recommendation from people you know, and look up their credentials. Ideally, your best choice for a surgeon to do your nose job is one that performs them regularly and has a background in ENT (ears, nose, and throat).