Micro-Polyurethane foam covered implant shell

Stability and dependability when you need it most

Microthane® vs silicone textured implants

What is the difference?

POLYTECH Microthane® implants are considered a safe choice, with lower complication rates even in complex cases of radiation treatment, which can dramatically increase the risk of capsular contracture [1, 2].

  • POLYTECH Microthane® implants are covered with a layer of micro-polyurethane foam not comparable to the surface of silicone textured implants
    – A 3D open pore matrix which acts like an internal tissue scaffold allowing true tissue ingrowth, vascularisation and blood flow within and across the surface of the implant
    – Not classified within the ISO 14607 : 2018 standards, the only official standard for implant textures
  • Polyurethane implants have proven safety in clinical practice for more than 4 decades

Favourable healing

The structure of the micro-polyurethane foam surface breaks the fibrotic pattern and encourages cellular involvement. It re-models the tissue into a sponge like and richly vascularised configuration around the implant.

Polyurethane foam coverered implants have measurable advantages over implants with a silicone textured or smooth surface and are not associated with an increased risk of complications.

The nature of this tissue interaction with the micro-polyurethane matrix is key

  • In preserving implant shape and position
  • In making the implant an integral part of the patients own tissue
  • In reducing the risk of capsular contracture3

Promoting a Highly Vascularised Capsule

Following implantation, the interaction between the implant and the surrounding tissue will determine the success of the implants acceptance by the patient’s body.

The 3D open pore matrix of the Microthane® surface provides a safe biofavouring transition layer into which the healing process can develop.

Progressively, over the course of several weeks, the implant’s Microthane® cover will fill with healthy
and highly vascularised tissue, ensuring the body’s immune system is active at the very surface of the implant as well as providing increased adherence and reducing the risk of device rotation and displacement [3].

Outstanding Safety Profile

2,113 patients with Microthane® implants – 12 years observational data [4]

  • Microthane® Data of 2,113 patients was analysed for over 12 years (4,094 breast implants in breast augmentation, reconstruction and implant exchange).
  • 74.5% had a breast augmentation.
  • Mean volume of Microthane® breast implants: 341ml ± 98ml.
  • The safety profile of Microthane® in this survey outperforms all other surfaces.
  • Only 16.4% of patients had any complication.
Distribution of patients according to the reason for the operation

Breast augmentation

Implant change

Breast reconstruction

Type of complicationAll Microthane® patients
Capsular contracture Baker grade III-IV0.7% (15)
Implant removal1.0% (20)
Seroma1.0% (22)
Haematoma1.0% (22)
Open wounds1.3% (27)
Revision Surgery1.5% (31)
Hardening /
Capsular contracture Baker grade I-II
6.5% (137)
Other10.7% (227)
Any complication16.4% (346)

Table 1: Proportion of complications according to the number of patients (2,113) who experienced at least one complication in one of the two breast implants. Possibility of multiple choice.

Product Range

POLYTECH offers the Microthane® cover in different base styles with the following product shapes filled with EasyFit GelTM:

  • Même®: Round base, central projection
  • Replicon®: Round base, anatomical projection
  • Opticon®: Short base, anatomical projection

Diagon\Gel® 4Two Series:

  • AR: Anatomical projection, round base
  • AO: Anatomical projection, short base

Implants of excellence

The company’s trust in the outstanding profile of the product is also reflected in our warranty programme. Apart from the lifetime rupture replacement, implants covered with Microthane® get replaced in cases of capsular contracture and rotation for lifetime after implantation.

Established in 2007, this extended warranty programme offers your patients specific benefits and peace of mind

Features at-a-glance

  • Support patient confidence and engagement
  • Lifetime implant replacement in the event of material related rupture**
  • Patients participate in an annual survey contributing to further innovation and patient safety
  • An opportunity for patients to stay in touch
  • Implant replacement*** for lifetime including rotation for Microthane® in the event of Baker III or IV capsular contracture including the contralateral breast in all cases in which such need is diagnosed by a surgeon

* See Warranty Terms and Conditions here »
** In the event of a material related loss of shell integrity
*** Excluding any costs of surgery

Surgeons recommend Microthane®

Quality manufactured in Germany

“As a woman and as a plastic surgeon, I think there is no other option for long lasting results than Microthane® in most of my cases”.

Dr. Luísa Magalhães Ramos Cirurgia Plástica, Lisboa

“If a family member asked me for an implant recommendation, it would be Microthane®. This is how much I believe in the product”.

Dr. Constantin Stan
Cronos Med Clinic, Bucharest

“I have 35 years’ experience with polyurethane implants. For me there is no implant like it. I am addicted”.

Professor Mario Pelle Ceravolo University of Padua, former President of the Italian Plastic Surgery Society

Tips for surgeons considering Microthane® implants for the first time

  1. Microthane® implants might feel slightly firmer for the first 8-10 months.
  2. The incision does not need to be longer than with any other cohesive gel implant.
  3. Microthane® implants can be inserted both through the inframammary or the areolar incision. The areolar incision has many advantages with Microthane® implants: more flexibility in the vertical positioning of the implant, full control the anterior surface and of the upper pole of the implant, especially, that the upper pole of the implant lies flat. This will prevent a crease from becoming particularly noticeable when the implant is placed subglandular.
  4. The pocket needs to be wide enough for the implant to sit relaxed on the chest wall.
  1. Microthane® implants placed in the subglandular plane feel significantly softer and more mobile than those placed in the submuscular plane. The softening of the prostheses takes place in a period of time ranging from 8 months to one year.
  2. Due to their excellent and rapid tissue ingrowth characteristics, surgeons can rotate the base of anatomical Microthane® implants to position the point of maximum projection in order to correct specific asymmetries or deformities.
  3. The implant should be positioned exactly where it should stay permanently. This might mean positioning the implant slightly lower than what one would do with a non-polyurethane implant as it does not „settle“.
  4. It is important to sit the patient up once the implants are put in situ to ensure the implants are sitting in the correct position.

Using Microthane® implants requires a short learning curve which mainly consists in learning to position the implant meticulously.

In the case of unsatisfactory results:

  1. The correction of obvious malpositioning or folds is easier before implant integration with the surrounding tissue. Therefore it should be considered within 3-4 weeks or 6 months postoperatively.
  2. When explanting a Microthane® implant intracapsularly, please use your fingers to detach the velcro effect between the capsule and the implant.
  3. It is not always necessary to perform a complete capsulectomy when replacing a smooth or textured implant with a Microthane® one. It is however important to remove a major part of the capsule to allow tissue ingrowth into the foam.

Recommendations obtained from:
Prof. Dr.Moustapha Hamdi (Brussels); Prof. Mario Pelle Ceravolo (Rome); Dr. Luisa Magalhães Ramos (Lisboa); Dr. Constantin Stan (Bucharest); Dr. Guillermo Vazquez (Argentina); Dr. Alexis Verpaele (Gent)


  1. Pompei, S., et al., “Polyurethane Implants in 2-Stage Breast Reconstruction: 9-Year Clinical Experience”, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, Volume 37, Issue 2, 1 February 2017, Pages 171-176, doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjw183.
  2. Pompei S, Evangelidou D, Arelli, F, Ferrante G. 2016. “The Modern Polyurethane-Coated Implant in Breast Augmentation: Long-Term Clinical Experience”. Aesthetic Surgery Journal 36(10):1124-1129.
  3. Verpaele A., Tonnard P, Experience with the new generation Micro Polyurethane covered Silicone breast implants, www.coupureseminars.
  4. Implants of Excellence, Annual Survey, 2007-2019, POLYTECH, Data on File.

Qmedical Technologies
©2024 Q Medical  |   Privacy Notice  |   Enviromental Impact  |   Environmental Policy  |   Modern slavery  |   Equality & diversity  |   Carbon Reduction   |   Supplier ethics  |   Vacancies