Scottish Daily Mail

Big­ger bust and smaller thighs in one jab

It takes flab from your legs to boost your boobs. Is this the per­fect cos­metic op?

- by Han­nah Ebelth­ite West Yorkshire · United Kingdom · London · Altrincham · Manchester · East Riding of Yorkshire · Everything Everywhere Limited · Wakefield · City of Wakefield · Royal Free Hospital · British Association for the Advancement of Science

ASLIM size eight, Marie John­son is proud of her shapely fig­ure. And well she might be, see­ing as she’s re­cently spent a hefty £7,500 boost­ing her cleav­age from a B to a D-cup.

But this is not the tale of yet an­other boob job — rather a boob jab. Marie has un­der­gone an al­ter­na­tive bust-boost­ing treat­ment called ‘fat trans­fer’, where fat was li­po­suc­tioned from her thighs and in­jected into her breasts.

And like in­creas­ing num­bers of women opt­ing for this less painful pro­ce­dure, she is de­lighted with the re­sults.

‘My breasts are fuller and firmer but look to­tally nat­u­ral,’ says the 45-year-old ac­coun­tancy of­fi­cer from West York­shire. ‘And my thighs have been sculpted a lit­tle, too. So it’s two for the price of one!’

So could this rad­i­cal tech­nique spell the end of boob jobs as we know them? Or is it all too good to be true?

Ex­perts have ex­pressed con­cerns that the trans­ferred fat might har­den and form oily cysts or scar tis­sue, or even en­cour­age breast can­cer — although this has not been proven.

The con­ven­tional boob job, us­ing im­plants, is the UK’s most com­mon cos­metic surgery — with 8,619 op­er­a­tions car­ried out last year. But fig­ures show de­mand has dropped by nearly a quar­ter, which may be due to the PIP breast im­plant scan­dal of 2012.

And sta­tis­tics from what­ sug­gest there’s been a 220 per cent in­crease in en­quiries about fat-graft breast en­large­ment over the past 12 months.

Known by a va­ri­ety of names — fat graft­ing, lipoaug­men­ta­tion or lipocon­tour­ing — fat trans­fer prom­ises a more nat­u­ral look and shorter re­cov­ery times.

‘I was fairly happy with the shape of my breasts,’ says Marie, who is cur­rently sin­gle. ‘I’ve not had chil­dren so they’ve not be­come saggy. But they were los­ing vol­ume on top. I didn’t like how I looked from the side. My breast­bone seemed more prom­i­nent as the breast tis­sue wasn’t so plump.’

It’s not that she wanted a ‘huge bust’, she says, and she re­jected the idea of im­plants be­cause she ‘didn’t like the idea of for­eign ob­jects in my body’.

As soon as she heard about the treat­ment, she booked a con­sul­ta­tion with Dr Martin Kin­sella, from the Re-En­hance Clinic in Wake­field, West York­shire. ‘He said I should have just about enough fat to har­vest from the tops of my legs with li­po­suc­tion,’ says Marie. ‘I went away to think about it and save up the money. It was a lot — £5,000.’

Dr Kin­sella, who’s of­fered fat trans­fer at his clin­ics in Cheshire, York­shire and Lon­don for five years, says: ‘Any in­ci­sions are tiny and there’s no scar­ring. We don’t use gen­eral anaes­thetic, just lo­cal and some se­da­tion. There’s no chance of al­ler­gic or ad­verse re­ac­tion as it uses your own tis­sue.

‘And it’s long-last­ing — once the fat set­tles and gains a blood source, it’s per­ma­nent, un­like fillers.’

SO In June 2014 Marie de­cided to go for it. ‘I was ner­vous,’ she ad­mits. ‘I was con­scious and chat­ting through­out the pro­ce­dure but felt calm. I did feel the odd twinge — noth­ing I couldn’t cope with.

‘The whole process took about two hours: an hour for the lipo, half an hour while they pre­pared the in­jec­tions, then half an hour to put the fat into my breasts.’

Dr Kin­sella ex­plains that he’s able to keep treat­ment time to a min­i­mum be­cause he uses a form of wa­ter-as­sisted li­po­suc­tion called Body­jet. ‘Li­po­suc­tion usu­ally uses ei­ther chem­i­cals, ul­tra­sound or wa­ter to break down fat so it can be sucked out of the body,’ he says.

‘Body­jet is a more gen­tle form of lipo that leaves fat cells vi­able, so they can be used im­me­di­ately.’

Two in­ci­sions are made un­der the breasts and the fat is then in­jected. And the ef­fect is im­me­di­ate: ‘At first, there is swelling that will go down, and a pro­por­tion of the fat we put in is re­ab­sorbed by the body,’ he says.

‘So for the first few weeks women’s breasts may look big­ger than they’d imag­ined. The fi­nal look can be seen around three months after treat­ment.’

When Marie got home, she tried on her sis­ter’s E-cup bra and was amazed it fit­ted. She says: ‘I had a mo­ment of panic, think­ing: “What have I done?” but over the next few weeks the swelling re­duced. It was never painful and I just had to wear a sup­port­ive,

nor­mal bra. I was very pleased with the even­tual re­sult. My breasts were even, smooth and fuller. I was be­tween a large B and a small C-cup.

‘No one no­ticed but that wasn’t my aim. I wanted to feel more con­fi­dent and cur­va­ceous in clothes.’

Marie was so pleased that this year she went back for more — plump­ing up to a small D-cup, which cost an ex­tra £2,500. ‘It’s been worth the money,’ says Marie. ‘I feel like I fill out clothes bet­ter now. I have a cleav­age I can show if I want. It has re­ally boosted my con­fi­dence.

‘No one has ever asked if I’ve had some­thing done. I think it’s be­cause they look so nat­u­ral. I did go on a few dates with a man who’d known me be­fore I had the fat trans­fers.

‘He cheek­ily sug­gested there was some­thing dif­fer­ent about me, but I didn’t let on. After all, my breasts are real, they’re all me.’

Dr Kin­sella, how­ever, points out that it isn’t for ev­ery­one: ‘Re­al­is­ti­cally, we can add one to two cup sizes. Any more would re­quire im­plants.

‘It is good for smaller-breasted women who want a mod­est in­crease in vol­ume and whose weight is sta­ble.’

Ac­cord­ing to Dr Kin­sella, more and more women are choos­ing the tech­nique to im­prove the look of ex­ist­ing im­plants. ‘Some­times women feel they look too ob­vi­ous, per­haps be­cause they’ve lost weight, or have en­cap­su­la­tion — where scar tis­sue forms around the im­plant,’ he ex­plains.

Emma Toolan, 42, a per­sonal as­sis­tant from Al­trin­cham, Manch­ester, was one such can­di­date. A sin­gle mum to Luca, 11, and Lot­tie, ten, she says: ‘I had breast im­plants nine years ago, when Lot­tie was one. Two preg­nan­cies and breast­feed­ing had left my breasts look­ing flat and un­shapely.

‘I went from a B-cup to a D-cup and looked great for a few years. But the trou­ble with im­plants is they can change with time. When I leaned for­wards, the skin at the sides of my breasts looked rip­pled and you could see the out­line of the im­plants. I won­dered whether to have them re­done.’

WHEN Emma heard about fat trans­fer, she didn’t take much con­vinc­ing. ‘I’d found hav­ing a boob job very un­com­fort­able with too much down­time,’ she says. ‘I was told that if enough fat was har­vested, grafts could be used else­where on my body, too.

‘I was con­scious of hav­ing a flat bot­tom so we dis­cussed trans­fer­ring some tis­sue to the tops of my but­tocks. The doc­tor said it would add curves and balance out my body. So I de­cided to go for both.

‘It was pricey at £4,500, but I liked the fact I’d be slim­mer, too. It was a three-in-one treat­ment.’ Emma had the pro­ce­dure in au­tumn of 2013 and says: ‘There was no dra­matic change; I hadn’t wanted one. But my breasts were a much bet­ter, more nat­u­ral shape and the rip­pling had gone.

‘The but­tock fat trans­fer gave me a more shapely bot­tom that, I feel, matches my top half now. Over­all, I feel much hap­pier with my body — and more con­fi­dent in my bikini.’

But not ev­ery­one sup­ports this quick fix. Stephen Hamil­ton, a con­sul­tant plas­tic sur­geon at Lon­don’s Royal Free Hospi­tal and spokesper­son for the Bri­tish As­so­ci­a­tion of Aes­thetic Plas­tic Sur­geons, says: ‘Women should re­alise that the tis­sue now in their breasts will be­have like fat tis­sue. So if they yo-yo diet they could quickly lose the ef­fects they paid so much for.’

But fat-trans­fer tech­niques are not to­tally new — they have been widely used for breast re­con­struc­tion, for ex­am­ple fol­low­ing a mas­tec­tomy or lumpec­tomy for breast can­cer. Dr Hamil­ton ex­plains: ‘This is one of sev­eral tech­niques used to great suc­cess — re­shap­ing, hid­ing in­den­ta­tions and scar­ring.’

Ter­essa Llewellyn, 44, was di­ag­nosed with breast can­cer aged 36 and un­der­went a dou­ble, bi­lat­eral mas­tec­tomy in Septem­ber 2006.

She mar­ried Neil, 37, this Septem­ber and they have two daugh­ters, Rhi­anne, 12 and Kiera, aged seven.

‘I was never in any doubt that I wanted to have my breasts re­con­structed as soon as pos­si­ble,’ says the se­nior carer from Beverley, East York­shire. ‘I was a gen­er­ous EE size be­fore the can­cer and wouldn’t feel com­plete with­out them.’

But im­plants weren’t an op­tion be­cause Ter­essa re­quired chemo and ra­dio­ther­apy, which would dam­age them. In­stead, she was of­fered a dor­sal re­con­struc­tion — where mus­cle is taken from the back and used to con­struct breasts — plus fat trans­fer to soften the ap­pear­ance.

The re­con­struc­tion was done in 2008 and the fat trans­fer a year later, both by sur­geon Penny McManus, at Cas­tle Hill Hospi­tal in Cot­ting­ham, East York­shire.

Ter­essa has since had two top-up trans­fers. She says: ‘My breasts are now full and soft and although they’re a C-cup rather than the dou­ble-E I had be­fore, they look just right on me. Fat trans­fer was the right choice for me and I can’t rec­om­mend it highly enough.

‘Breast can­cer takes away your fem­i­nin­ity and iden­tity. Now I feel more like me again.’­

 ?? Pic­ture: PAUL JONES PHO­TOG­RA­PHY ?? From B-cup to D-cup: Marie John­son be­fore (left) and after the fat-trans­fer pro­ce­dure
Pic­ture: PAUL JONES PHO­TOG­RA­PHY From B-cup to D-cup: Marie John­son be­fore (left) and after the fat-trans­fer pro­ce­dure
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK