The Naked Truth About Preservation™ Breast Augmentation

A Modern Approach to Natural-Looking Breast Enhancement in Newport Beach

Key Takeaways

• Preservation™ breast augmentation focuses on maintaining natural anatomy rather than disrupting it 
• It may offer less discomfort, faster recovery, and more natural movement 
• Motiva® implants pair well with Preservation™ techniques, but are not required 
• No technique eliminates capsular contracture, but the risk may be reduced with advanced methods and implant technology 
• The best results come from customized surgical planning—not a one-size-fits-all approach 

What Is Preservation™ Breast Augmentation?

Preservation™ breast augmentation is an advanced surgical technique designed to maintain natural tissue structures and minimize muscle disruption during breast implant placement.

Unlike traditional dual-plane or submuscular approaches, this method prioritizes:

• Preserving the pectoralis muscle 
• Maintaining natural breast support structures 
• Reducing trauma to the surrounding tissue 

👉 According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, surgical approaches that minimize tissue disruption can contribute to improved recovery experiences and patient satisfaction.

Preservation™ vs. Dual-Plane Augmentation

Feature	Preservation™	Dual-Plane
Muscle disruption	Minimal	Partial release
Recovery time	Often faster	Moderate
Implant movement	More natural	Can cause animation
Pain level	Typically lower	Moderate
Anatomy preservation	High	Moderate

Traditional dual-plane augmentation remains a proven and appropriate option, especially for patients needing additional upper breast coverage.

👉 Clinical insights from the Aesthetic Society support tailoring surgical technique based on patient anatomy rather than relying on a single approach.

Do You Need Motiva® Implants for Preservation™?

No—Preservation™ surgery does not require Motiva® implants, but they are often used together for optimal results.

Why Motiva® Works Well with Preservation™

Motiva® Ergonomix implants are designed to:

• Adapt to movement and gravity 
• Feel softer and more natural 
• Reduce visible rippling 

When paired with Preservation™ techniques, patients may experience:

• Enhanced natural movement 
• Improved aesthetic outcomes 
• Better integration with existing tissue 

👉 Research published in the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Journal highlights the importance of implant cohesivity and placement technique in achieving natural-looking results.

Cost of Preservation™ Breast Augmentation in Newport Beach

In Newport Beach and Orange County, most procedures range from $9,500 to $18,000+.

Factors That Affect Cost:

• Surgeon expertise and specialization 
• Implant type and technology 
• Complexity of your anatomy 
• Primary vs. revision surgery 
• Use of support materials (e.g., mesh or fat grafting) 

👉 The American Board of Cosmetic Surgery notes that surgeon experience and technique are among the most important factors influencing outcomes.

Bottom line: The lowest price rarely delivers the best result—especially in revision cases.

Can Preservation™ Prevent Capsular Contracture?

No surgical technique can fully eliminate capsular contracture.

However, Preservation™ methods may help reduce risk by:

• Minimizing tissue trauma 
• Preserving the blood supply 
• Reducing inflammation 

Other Factors That Influence Risk:

• Bacterial contamination 
• Implant surface characteristics 
• Individual healing response 

Motiva® implants have shown low reported rates of capsular contracture in clinical data.

👉 According to the National Institutes of Health, capsular contracture is a multifactorial condition influenced by both surgical and biological factors.

Is Preservation™ Right for Thin Patients?

Yes—but with careful planning.

Challenges for Thin Patients:

• Limited natural tissue coverage 
• Higher visibility of implants 
• Increased risk of rippling 

Solutions May Include:

• Strategic implant selection 
• Fat grafting for additional coverage 
• Hybrid augmentation techniques 
• Advanced materials like AlloClae® 

👉 The International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery emphasizes individualized treatment planning for optimal outcomes in patients with low body fat.

Final Word—The Naked Truth

Modern breast augmentation is no longer just about placing an implant—it’s about precision, preservation, and personalization.

Today’s best outcomes focus on:

• Preserving anatomy 
• Enhancing natural movement 
• Reducing recovery time and discomfort 
• Delivering results that look and feel natural 

The best breast augmentation is one that no one notices—except you.

Meet Your Surgeons

With decades of combined experience, Dr. Horowitz and Dr. Andre specialize in advanced breast surgery techniques, including revision procedures and natural-looking augmentation. Their approach combines surgical precision with a deep understanding of aesthetics to deliver results that are both beautiful and long-lasting.

Ready to Learn More?

If you’re considering Preservation™ Breast Augmentation with Motiva® implants, the most important step is your consultation.

A personalized evaluation will determine:

• The best technique for your anatomy 
• The ideal implant type and size 
• A plan tailored to your goals

References

1. Maxwell, G.P. and Gabriel, A. (2017) ‘The evolution of breast implants’, Clinics in Plastic Surgery, 44(1), pp. 1–13. 
2. Maxwell, G.P., Gabriel, A. and Sigalove, S. (2019) ‘The Motiva Ergonomix round silk surface breast implant: design and biomechanics’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 39(Supplement_2), pp. S15–S27. 
3. Sigalove, S., Maxwell, G.P., Gabriel, A. and Storm-Dickerson, T. (2020) ‘Prepectoral breast reconstruction using smooth surface implants: a modern paradigm’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open, 8(3), e2648. 
4. Stevens, W.G., Nahabedian, M.Y., Calobrace, M.B. and Harrington, J. (2021) ‘Contemporary approaches to breast implant selection and outcomes’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 41(Supplement_2), pp. S55–S67. 
5. Jones, P., Mempin, M., Hu, H. et al. (2018) ‘The functional influence of breast implant outer shell morphology on bacterial attachment and growth’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 142(4), pp. 837–849. 
6. Tebbetts, J.B. (2006) ‘Dual plane breast augmentation: optimizing implant-soft tissue relationships’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 118(7 Suppl), pp. 81S–98S.
   (Foundational comparison reference for dual-plane vs newer preservation approaches) 
7. Hall-Findlay, E.J. (2011) ‘A simplified vertical reduction mammaplasty: short scar techniques and breast shaping principles’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 127(6), pp. 2381–2393. 
8. Hammond, D.C. (2017) ‘Augmentation mastopexy: general considerations’, Clinics in Plastic Surgery, 44(1), pp. 93–102. 
9. Spear, S.L. and Murphy, D.K. (2014) ‘AlloDerm and breast surgery: applications and outcomes’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 133(2), pp. 281–290. 
10. Nahabedian, M.Y. (2018) ‘Implant-based breast reconstruction and augmentation: current concepts’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 141(5), pp. 902e–913e. 
11. Mallucci, P. and Branford, O.A. (2014) ‘Concepts in aesthetic breast dimensions: analysis of the ideal breast’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 134(3), pp. 436–447. 
12. Swanson, E. (2013) ‘Prospective outcome study of 225 cases of breast augmentation’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 131(4), pp. 843–851. 
13. Adams, W.P. Jr. (2017) ‘Achieving predictable results in breast augmentation’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 37(2), pp. 146–158.
14.  Calobrace, M.B., Schwartz, M.R. and Zeidler, K.R. (2020) ‘Long-term safety of silicone gel breast implants’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 40(Supplement_1), pp. S1–S12.
15.  Gabriel, A., Sigalove, S. and Maxwell, G.P. (2022) ‘Advances in smooth surface breast implants and clinical outcomes’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open, 10(1), e4018.
16. Stevens, W.G. and Harrington, J. (2022) ‘Modern breast augmentation: trends, safety,       and patient expectations’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 42(4), pp. 395–405.
17. iger Aesthetics Portfolio – Official News
18. AlloClae™ Structural Adipose Filler – Tiger BioSciences
19. Morel SBA, Vranis N, Perez J, Nikolis A, Ghavami A, Safran T. Current Applications and Indications of Allograft Adipose Matrix: A Systematic Review. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2025 Oct 7. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000012506. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 41056060.