he need for anatomical implants for breast augmentation surgery has been widely debated. [1][2][3] Anatomical breast implants can provide surgeons with a wider range of options to tailor breast augmentation to the dimensions of the individual patient. In our experience, they are especially valuable for women with glandular ptosis who prefer to avoid augmentation-mastopexy. 1,4 However, anatomical implants have an inherent risk of rotation malposition, which is not an issue with round implants, and for this reason, many surgeons are reluctant to use them. 5,6 Previous studies reported a 1.1 percent to 14 percent incidence of implant rotation. 4,[6][7][8][9] However, the majority of these studies 4,7,8,10 were performed with macrotextured implants (e.g., Allergan/McGhan), which are proposed to be less inclined to rotate than microtextured implants because macrotextured implants adhere to the capsule. 11,12 With Allergan's recent retraction of Biocell implants due to their suspected relationship to breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), more data are needed on the risk of rotation with microtextured anatomical implants. 13 In this study, we investigated consecutive patients who underwent breast augmentation or implant exchange with Mentor's microtextured anatomical implants. Furthermore, we present

No abstract