Epione Investigates Natural Breast Augmentation: Making Good Use of Bad Fat

Much as many women may lament the amount of fat in their bodies, there’s one place where not enough fat is sure to cause worries and woes: the breasts. Fat is the most important element in the size and shape of a woman’s breasts, and without the breast size and shape they desire, many women begin to look into augmentation procedures.

But is there perhaps a way to use one worry to resolve the other—a way to take excess fat from one part of a woman’s body and use it to enhance her breasts?

Dr. Simon Ourian, Medical Director of Epione Beverly Hills, is investigating just such an innovative procedure that is making headlines throughout the medical community.

The process involves transferring fat from one part of the body into the breasts. As one might expect, the procedure begins with liposuction. Liposuction using lasers almost always renders the fat unusable for transfer, while types that use ultrasound energy and pressurized water leave the fat ready for reuse elsewhere in the body.

One would naturally ask: is this procedure safe?

Naturally, many of the concerns that come from traditional implants, such as silicone, won’t occur with the fat transfer procedure. For example, as this augmentation is composed of body fat actually integrated into the existing tissue, one needn’t worry about the augmentation material rupturing. Also, as the augmentation is derived from the body’s own cells, there’s no risk of the body rejecting it.

That being said, Dr, Ourian is aware of the only recently lifted ban on using fat transfer for breast augmentation which raise valid questions concerning the safety of the procedure.

One concern includes the worry that the fat injected into the breast could cause calcification to occur creating a physical barrier to the accuracy of standard mammography tests. The medical community has not reached a consensus on this question, but a large number of doctors have responded with overwhelming approval of the procedure, especially as compared to traditional implant augmentation. As one doctor reported, new digital mammograms can easily identify calcification in the breasts, thus the mammogram is hardly impaired. Plus, when compared with the consequences of traditional implant augmentation, which block more than half the breast from the view of the mammogram, fat transfer augmentation begins to appear as a potentially safer alternative.

Another valid concern is whether or not enough of the fat transferred from one part of the body into the breasts will survive to call the procedure a success. Much like the first concern, there has not been an absolute consensus across the medical community about this question, but a large number of doctors agree that the likelihood of the fat surviving largely depends on the techniques used to acquire and then transfer the fat.

Thus, if the doctor uses the old, banned techniques, one can expect that a large percentage of the fat transferred will not survive and a second procedure will be required. Conversely, if the doctor uses the new techniques, one can expect 85-90% of the transferred fat to survive. If the doctor also implements new stem cell techniques, the transfer becomes even more effective.