{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,17]],"date-time":"2026-10-17T15:49:15Z","timestamp":1792252155011,"version":"4.4.0"},"reference-count":17,"publisher":"Oxford University Press (OUP)","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,4]],"date-time":"2026-09-04T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1788480000000},"content-version":"am","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/pages\/standard-publication-reuse-rights"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Breast implants remain the cornerstone of aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery, yet surgeon device selection is frequently driven by manufacturer marketing, social media, and brand loyalty rather than objective scientific data.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive, side-by-side qualitative and quantitative comparison of current-generation silicone gel breast implants from the 4 major US manufacturers, characterizing each device's gel, shell, and gel-shell interface properties.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Two unopened, currentgeneration 6-Lite and Generation 6 implants were obtained from each of Allergan (Inspira Responsive, Inspira SoftTouch; Irvine, CA, USA), Mentor (MemoryGel BOOST, MemoryGel Xtra; Irvine, CA, USA), Motiva (Ergonomix, Round; Austin, TX, USA), and Sientra (106\/HSC, 107\/HSC+; Franklin, WI, USA). Eight assessment methods were applied: still-photography tilt-table analysis, time-in-motion video analysis, gel-shell pinch-roll testing, BTC-2000 biomechanical gel evaluation, tensiometer gel-shell peel testing, in vivo high-resolution ultrasound imaging, blinded patient tactile assessment, and matrix usability scoring.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Mentor MemoryGel BOOST demonstrated the most form-stable gel across all 5 BTC-2000 parameters, the longest pinch-roll endpoint, and the longest tensiometer peel time with significant retained gel, indicating the strongest gel-shell interaction. Despite this form stability, BOOST was the third-highest-rated implant on blinded patient tactile assessment, with MemoryGel Xtra ranked first. Sientra 106 and Motiva Ergonomics was consistently the least form-stable. Allergan implants demonstrated the highest ultrasound shell visualization clarity. Allergan also achieved the highest matrix usability score, reflecting broad dimensional uniformity and profile diversity across aesthetic and reconstructive applications.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Current silicone gel breast implants demonstrate measurable, manufacturer-specific differences in gel behavior, shell properties, gel-shell interaction, sonographic appearance, and clinical applicability. These findings support a paradigm shift toward science-driven implant selection and provide objective data to guide surgeon decision-making.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Level of Evidence: 4 (Therapeutic)<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p\/>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1093\/asj\/sjag185","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,4]],"date-time":"2026-09-04T11:42:44Z","timestamp":1788522164000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["The Science of Modern Breast Implants: A Qualitative and Quantitative Comparison of Silicone Breast Devices"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-4644-7217","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Khaled O","family":"Alameddine","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Shikhar","family":"Tomur","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"suffix":"Jr","given":"William P","family":"Adams","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,4]]},"reference":[{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"887","DOI":"10.1093\/asj\/sjx127","article-title":"What's your micromort? A patient-oriented analysis of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL)","volume":"37","author":"Sieber","year":"2017","journal-title":"Aesthet Surg J"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B2","first-page":"1117","volume-title":"Surgery of the Breast: Principles and Art","author":"Adams","year":"2012"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"7S","DOI":"10.1097\/prs.0000000000005959","article-title":"The science of cohesivity and elements of form stability","volume":"144","author":"Gabriel","year":"2019","journal-title":"Plast Reconstr Surg"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"6S","DOI":"10.1097\/prs.0000000000000347","article-title":"The biology and evolution of cohesive gel and shaped implants","volume":"134","author":"Calobrace","year":"2014","journal-title":"Plast Reconstr Surg"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"54","DOI":"10.1177\/229255030000800201","article-title":"Current status of breast implant survival properties and the management of the woman with silicone gel breast implants","volume":"8","author":"Peters","year":"2000","journal-title":"Can J Plast Surg"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"40S","DOI":"10.1097\/01.prs.0000286666.29101.11","article-title":"Style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implant core study results at 3\u2005years","volume":"120","author":"Bengtson","year":"2007","journal-title":"Plast Reconstr Surg"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"556","DOI":"10.1097\/prs.0000000000007635","article-title":"MemoryGel breast implants: final safety and efficacy results after 10\u2005years of follow-up","volume":"147","author":"Caplin","year":"2021","journal-title":"Plast Reconstr Surg"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"395","DOI":"10.1177\/1090820X10374101","article-title":"Contemporary decision making and perception in patients undergoing cosmetic breast augmentation","volume":"30","author":"Walden","year":"2010","journal-title":"Aesthet Surg J"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/asjof\/ojaf117","article-title":"Drivers and barriers of breast augmentation surgery: multinational insights","volume":"7","author":"Adams","year":"2025","journal-title":"Aesthet Surg J Open Forum"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"47S","DOI":"10.1097\/prs.0000000000000349","article-title":"Silicone gel breast implants: science and testing","volume":"134","author":"Kinney","year":"2014","journal-title":"Plast Reconstr Surg"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"264","DOI":"10.1093\/asj\/sjy103","article-title":"Physical properties of silicone gel breast implants","volume":"39","author":"Jewell","year":"2019","journal-title":"Aesthet Surg J"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"166","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jpra.2022.02.004","article-title":"History of breast implants: back to the future","volume":"32","author":"Santanelli di Pompeo","year":"2022","journal-title":"JPRAS Open"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"965","DOI":"10.1093\/asj\/sjv080","article-title":"Lightweight breast implants: a novel solution for breast augmentation and reconstruction mammaplasty","volume":"35","author":"Govrin-Yehudain","year":"2015","journal-title":"Aesthet Surg J"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B14","author":"Sientra\u00ae"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B15","author":"Motiva"},{"key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B16","author":"(ISO) ISfO"},{"issue":"1","key":"2026101711162062900_sjag185-B17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"48","DOI":"10.1093\/asj\/sjae165","article-title":"Outcomes of in-office, high resolution, ultrasound silicone breast implant surveillance by plastic surgeons","volume":"45","author":"Glener","year":"2024","journal-title":"Aesthet Surg J"}],"container-title":["Aesthetic Surgery Journal"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/asj\/advance-article-pdf\/doi\/10.1093\/asj\/sjag185\/70965379\/sjag185.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"am","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/asj\/advance-article-pdf\/doi\/10.1093\/asj\/sjag185\/70965379\/sjag185.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,17]],"date-time":"2026-10-17T15:16:52Z","timestamp":1792250212000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/asj\/advance-article\/doi\/10.1093\/asj\/sjag185\/8786009"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,4]]},"references-count":17,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/asj\/sjag185","relation":{},"ISSN":["1090-820X","1527-330X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1090-820X","type":"print"},{"value":"1527-330X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,4]]},"article-number":"sjag185"}}