How much of implant is lost with unders?

by Starz-10 29th April 2010, 12:55 pm

I think I read somewhere on here that if you have unders then some of the volume of the implant is lost by the muscle? So when trying the sizes on at consultations you will actually turn out smaller than they look if having them under the muscle? Does anyone know if that is right?

by **COOKIE** 29th April 2010, 12:57 pm

I think nads will be best to answer this question but from what I can recall from her changing from unders to overs there is no volume loss at all. Nads still measures the same after changing to overs. If the theory were true, she would now measure larger, but she doesn't. xxx

by ang24ang 29th April 2010, 1:37 pm

My surgeon said you do lose some going under and should choose a slighty bigger implant when going under.

However as cookie said Nad has gone from under to over so she would be the best person to tell you.

I am also changing from unders too overs in 12 days so I will be intereseted to find out myself!

xx

by walshy 29th April 2010, 1:49 pm

I had unders on monday the 26th and am so happy with them. My surgeon at the HMG told me you only lose about 5% so not much really. in my oppinion they look so much better and will also last longer. Of course the decision is yours! x

by misf1 30th April 2010, 12:22 am

I really dont think there would be a significant difference, as cookie has said nads changed placement and doesn't notice a difference in size, so if there is one, it would be millimeters in size and unnoticeable.

by Grace 30th April 2010, 6:46 am

I was told 20% but based on Nads experience that does not seem to be the case
Lots of love
Grace
xxx

by **nads** 30th April 2010, 7:11 am

The girls are right, you dont lose any significant size at all because the muscle only covers a small portion of the implant. Im the same size with 275 overs as i was with unders, onlythe upper pole area is a little fuller x

by woekitten 30th April 2010, 3:49 pm

im having 380 unders, and i got told that when i tried the 340 on, thats what the 380 would look like as unders.

Also, i thought that all unders were really just partially under, but ive been told fully under.
Worried now!

by mandy_moo 30th April 2010, 4:30 pm

from what i can gather, some surgeons do fully under, and some do partial unders...thats where they put 2/3 of the implant behind the muscle, and the other1/3 is at the bottom of the breast to give a more natural look

hasnt your surgeon told you what he's doing for you? plus i saw your other post about sizing, and even tho i cant reallly give you any help with what you'll end up, i'm really surprised your surgeon hasnt given you an idea!! have you spoken to your PC about it/ maybe you'll get more joy from her!!

by Starz-10 30th April 2010, 6:48 pm

I am having partial unders and am really hoping I don't lose much of the volume! It seems like some people don't lose volume but others have been told a little will be lost, it's so confusing! I was told when I tried the sizes on that that is what I will end up with but I didn't ask about any loss with them being placed under the muscle, I just assumed they would be the same size, it was only after thinking about it that I remembered I had read about volume loss before. I just hope I don't end up too small then!

by Sponsored content

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

How much of implant is lost with unders?

How much of implant is lost with unders?

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?

Hi

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?

Re: How much of implant is lost with unders?