UNDER OR OVER? NATURAL NIPPLE LIFT???

SO… im 5’6 14/16 curvy and empty 38c i want larger, rounder higher profile
i had two consultation yesterday
First : nipple lift and 450cc under the muscle – up to 550 over the muscle
MYA : over muscle no need for nipple lift as they naturally lift the larger the cc (550cc)
Im not keen on the slope i seem to see with the under muscle implants, im after upper roundness and never really factored in having a nipple lift as i had already assumed this would naturally happen when filling the floppy bag of skin im left with after 3 children.

im left really conflicted with two totally different opinions.

Whats everyones personal opinion when it comes to the under/over decision?

As a general rule of thumb it depends on your level of ptosis – e.g you can measure this if your nipple sits below your side boob breast crease. So it definitely depends how much your natural breasts sag, just bare in mind of course the weight of a large implant can potentially make this worse over time. I had the same sort of situation as you and was told I couldn’t go lower than 350cc in order to fill out my natural breast pocket before then filling the upper pole. I’m only 8 days PO but so far so good as the high profile implant seems to have really lifted my nipple area. I believe over the muscle placement generally fills out sagging natural breast better, I’ve seen most people in this situation have overs. But again you do have to bare in mind the weight of implant, especially if you’re going 400/500cc. My surgeon went dual plane (partial) as the muscle will give a bit more support and slight hold to the implant to reduce any chance of sagging. I also had textured implants as they drop less than smooth so this is something to ask your surgeon about too. You can definately get a good level of upper pole fullness with both under or over muscle and I’ve seen so many great results with both so ultimately it is what your surgeon advises really! Hope this helps in any way x

[Author]

Posts