Download PDF
Facial Plast Surg 2017; 33(02): 241-243
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1599093
Letter to the Editor
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Facial Augmentation using Expanded Polytetrafluoroethylene Covered Silicone

Sami P. Moubayed
1   Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California
,
Chayada Chanasriyotin
1   Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California
,
Sam P. Most
1   Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
07 April 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Two commonly used implant materials for aesthetic facial augmentation[1] are solid silicone (silastic) and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE; Gore-Tex, W. L. Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, AZ). The main shortcomings of silicone are capsular formation and implant visibility ([Fig. 1]).[2] EPTFE implants have micropores on the surface that allow for tissue ingrowth, stabilization, and avoidance of a capsule.[2] However, these have the potential for long-term deformation due to shrinkage.[2] The rationale for the composite implant is that it offers the benefits of silicone (maintenance of form, natural feel) with the biocompatibility of ePTFE coating as a biological interface. In this letter, we aim to examine our indications and outcomes with this material.

Zoom Image
Fig. 1 Dorsal nasal silicone implant showing peripheral calcification. Sagittal section of a computed tomography scan of the sinuses in a patient having undergone dorsal nasal augmentation with a silicone implant 20 years ago showing a calcified capsule surrounding the implant (white arrows).