Perfect example of an extremely high difficulty breast augmentation case in a patient suffering severe hypoplasia of the breasts, pigeon chest or pectum carinatum, plus associated thin and filmy skin in high risk of rippling and quite lateral breast mounds.
Additionally the breasts are sitting too lateral, with lateral nipples and side boob prominence, which is another anatomical feature not only conditioning the surgical planning but also a congenitally conditioned abnormality to be very seriously considered by the surgeon in order to prevent an eccentricity deformity; such lateral breast are candidates to three strategies; one is ignoring the nipple areola complex location and ignore the breast mound location, to set the implants eccentric to the nipple areola complex well close together in the midline to achieve a full and tight cleavage, but this would produce an aberrant deformity of cross eyed breasts with nipples laterally eccentric located at the sides of the breasts; the second technical approach is setting the implants centred beneath the nipple areola complex but oversized in width with the aim of filling up the cleavage but exceeding the anatomical limits of the real mammary base, which would cause a severe side boob deformity; finally, the only acceptably technical design is carrying ahead a perfectly fitted and anatomically adapted augmentation mammoplasty, in which the breast implants are centred with precise correspondence to the nipple areola complex and the width of the prostheses is matching the real anatomical base and limits of the mammary mound, in which the patient understands her peculiar chest features; the latter is the only approach leading to brilliant results like is seen on this case, in spite the cleave is wide apart and the breast mounds laterally located, but this is how the patient was born and the augmentation mammoplasty is only such thing, augmenting the breasts in their size, and not else thing, keeping in mind other tempting technical options would necessarily lead to a poor result and a certain revision in the future.
This patient expressly sought a very natural breast augmentation result of large size with the highest grade of rippling prevention, still being compatible with her regular sports practice.
Another challenge in these skinny patients with such high grade of breast hypoplasia and slim body frame is achieving naturalness and prevent fake looks, rippling, visible kinks and any deformity due to the cutaneous transparency; this was accomplished with modern anatomical shaped implants filled with cohesive gel, which is the golden standard nowadays, placed in the minimally invasive and non aggressive safe subfascial pocket, the technique of choice to prevent complications and bad results. This is feasible even with large implants like in this case in which the patient sought an extra large size for her new boobs.
PRODUCT PURCHASE | STANDARD QUOTATION | COMBO SPECIAL APPLIED | DISCOUNT % | DISCOUNT € | FINAL QUOTATION |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Breast implants anatomical 5G | 5.490,98€ | N/A | 0% | 0€ | 5.490,98€ |
TOTAL | 5.490,98€ | 0,00% | 0,00€ | 5.490,98€ |
Due to the competitiveness scenario of the markets most plastic surgery clinics and plastic surgeons feel forced to invest large sums of money into advertising and marketing campaigns; this non medical additional cost is always and necessarily charged on top of the final price paid by patients, leading thus to an overprice of surgeries and treatments. No one patient wishes to bear that financial burden embedded in the surgical costs, furthermore neither surgeons nor clinics are happy to increase their retail prices and penalize their customers with costs not bringing any kind of special medical benefit, safety enhancements or results improvement; the promotion budget aims only to disseminate the public knowledge of a services provider and raise the awareness about its presence to potential customers, but not to make the service or the product a better one.
Seems like this model is a no-way-out labyrinth from which no one can be freed, furthermore it is such a tempting, easy and hassle-free way that actually most patients and plastic surgery providers are locked into it, happily or with resignation, paying a high price due to being non collaborative; however there is an ideal alternative, based on keeping up a good hard work based on a strive for providing quality service and achieving patients' satisfaction, which necessarily requires the decided support of the clients and somehow their involvement in such virtuous business model grounded on top-notch results
When plastic surgery providers and patients do actively engage into a collaborative economy scenario a win-win basis is set for their relationship, since the clinics and surgeons obtain the best promotion ever possible with no budget for marketing investment and the patients get in return rid of any additional and unnecessary costs; such a price reduction does not represent any loss in the quality of the treatment they are receiving, furthermore this saving achieved will actually reward customers with a reinforced confidence and guarantee the service providers will strive to perform the best job possible and obtain results second to none.
It is not a paradox or contradiction; under a collaborative economy umbrella plastic surgery patients enjoy a greater plus of confidence that clinics and surgeons will do their very best and beyond to satisfy their customers, in spite the price is lower than in marketing-based non collaborative models; plastic surgery providers who found their business sustainability on the pillars of exclusively or mainly incremental budget investment in ongoing promotion campaigns do have little incentive in achieving first-class results and the best patient experiences, since their business model is not based on returning patients after word-of-mouth dissemination of their reputation but on the attraction of cold clients with sophisticated advertising methods of higher or lesser moral acceptability, attracting customers as parachutists randomly landing on unknown land, which is a perverse business model frequently leading to an unavoidable degradation of safety and results quality besides an uncontrollable increase in costs and prices; this marketing-based model creates no incentives to keep up the good work and pushes the prices higher on and on due to require increasing promotional investments.
On the other side, which is definitely our side, clinics and surgeons who rely solely or mostly their existence and survival in the competitive plastic surgery market enjoying the widespread of their excellence extended by their own patients results and satisfaction, like a mill driven by the winds of prestige, have the strongest ever incentive to be the best service providers around, sourced from the support of happy clients and their operated cases as proof of their excellent jobs; needless to say such supporters, the patients, have to enjoy a share of this benefit so that the incentive is reciprocal; under this scenario clinics and surgeons strive to provide the best service and accordingly patients release and transfer in a fair exchange the materials and tools required to build a marketing-budget-free and virtuous business model which creates the perfect incentives to build the best sponsorship-free reputation, based on the grounds of medical quality thus allowing prices control within affordability thanks to the minimal cost of its maintenance.
This is the deal; patients give in our favor the release and transfer of the intellectual property, the rights of image, the medical records and the personal data of their cases for scientific dissemination, medical teaching, public communication, commercial promotion, advertising marketing, commercial exploitation and disclosure in general, and they receive in exchange a compensating remuneration of a -20% discount from the standard price list for our treatments, as it is publicly visible by default in all the prices and quotations on our website.
As can be observed our visible prices are highly competitive if compared with other plastic surgery providers, actually the difference is approximately a -20% from the average price of each particular treatment in other clinics and surgeons from similar economical areas and countries of comparable development; this is not due to any quality or safety downgrading but to our collaborative business model; in other words, the budget which theoretically should be invested in marketing and promotion campaigns is discounted from the retail prices and, unlike other plastic surgery providers, is not wasted into pointless advertising to patients which entails no kind of added value for them; such campaigns are replaced with our superb results publicized thanks our patients support by letting us use their cases' Before & After and Intraoperative & Technical images and medical details; this explains that price gap between us and other clinics and surgeons.
Print screen alert
You attempted an unauthorized action. All contents of this site are private and protected. Print screen are not allowed. We have reported with your data location to prevent any ilegal action against the protected contents of this website.