Breast Augmentation Incisions


Breast Implants can be inserted via any of the above four routes. Naturally, there are pros and cons with each approach and our Surgeon will explain these to you in detail at your Consultation.

Essentially, the differences are as follows:

Advantages Disadvantages
(incision in the fold under the breast)
The most popular choice with patients.

Provides unrestricted pocket visibility for the surgeon.

Any size implant can be inserted.

Drains are not necessary.

Any future revision surgery can be performed through the same scar.

Leaves a scar in the fold under the breast.

Although the scar should hide well in the fold when standing, it can be more visible when lying down.

Asian or brown skin has a higher risk of forming brown pigmented scars.

Pigmented , thick or keloid scars could mar the appearance of an otherwise beautiful result if you are prone to them.

(via the armpit)
Scar is placed in an inconspicuous skin crease within the armpit.

No visible ‘tell-tale’ scar on or around the breast.

An option worthy of consideration for those with brown or Asian skin who may form brown pigmented scars, or those with a history of thick or keloid scars.

(Please note that the same type scars could still result, the only difference being that they would be hidden in the armpits rather than being more visible under or on the breasts).

Although any size fillable saline implant can be inserted via this route, the small incision does limit the size of a silicone implant.

Only round implants can be inserted via this route.

‘Tear-Drop’ (Anatomical) shaped implants of any make cannot be inserted via this route.

Polyurethane Foam-Covered Implants, whatever the shape (‘tear drop’ or round), cannot be inserted via this route.

Drains are always used – these are usually removed on the following day.

Any future revision surgery would likely need the infra-mammary route thereby creating a second scar.

(half way around the edge of the areola i.e. the pigmented area around the nipple).
Scar can be less conspicuous than with the infra-mammary incision. The small incision limits this approach to small silicone implants or any size fillable saline implants.

The dissection could sever some of the milk ducts around the nipple and interfere with future breast-feeding.

It has also been suggested that this route may cause ‘seeding’ of the resident nipple duct bacteria into the implant pocket and thereby cause a pocket infection.

Not suitable for Polyurethane Foam-Covered implants.

Any future revision surgery would most likely need the infra-mammary route thus creating a second scar.

(through the navel)
Scar is very small and located well away from the breast. Not popular or commonly performed in Australia.

Only suitable for fillable saline implants.

Difficult to create an aesthetic and refined implant pocket from such a distant entry point.

The passage of the surgical instrument can leave grooves under the abdominal skin.

Any future revision surgery would need to be done through the infra-mammary route.