The Use of Polymethylmetacrylate (PMMA) in Bioplasty

Authors

  • Eduardo Luiz da Costa Bioplastia Brasil Clinic, Goiânia, GO, Brazil Author
  • Anália Cirqueira Milhomem Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil Author
  • Anelise Camila Schaedler Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil Author
  • Isabella Mendes de Souza Jorge Medicine School, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil Author
  • Marina Clare Vinaud Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil Author
  • Ruy de Souza Lino Junior Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47363/JDMRS/2024(5)168

Keywords:

Polymethyl Methacrylate, Esthetics, Incidence, Female

Abstract

Introduction: Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) is an alloplastic compound used for body and facial filling, commercialized in microsphere format diluted in purified vehicles, and used as polymer applied to bioplasty. In Brazil, infiltrative PMMA implants are being used in order to restore the volume lost during the aging process and the formation of wrinkles and other types of facial depressions or body asymmetries. PMMA is a polymer that stimulates neocollagenesis, causing a controlled inflammatory reaction, which stabilizes the material and defines the implant site. However, there is still a lack of documentation and research on possible adverse reactions to this material. 

Methods: This is a restrospective study of bioplasty patients attended at a private clinic from 2005 to 2019. Demographic profile of the patients was registered, as well as the PMMA commercial brand used in them, concentration, site of implantation among other aspects related to the procedure. 506 charts were included; all patients were women, 49.4% were middle aged. 

Results: The main complaint was aesthetic (94.3%). The most performed diagnostics were nasal alteration (33.6%). The most implanted site was the nose (84.4%) and the most used brand was Linnea Safe, at 30%. Only one patient (0.2%) presented complication which was infection. 

Conclusion: PMMA implantation was mainly performed in the nose of middle-aged women and with low incidence of adverse reactions. More studies regarding incidence and epidemiology of PMMA implantation are needed. 

Author Biographies

  • Eduardo Luiz da Costa, Bioplastia Brasil Clinic, Goiânia, GO, Brazil

    Bioplastia Brasil Clinic, Goiânia, GO, Brazil

  • Anália Cirqueira Milhomem, Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

    Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

  • Anelise Camila Schaedler, Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

    Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

  • Isabella Mendes de Souza Jorge, Medicine School, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

    Medicine School, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

  • Marina Clare Vinaud, Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

    Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

  • Ruy de Souza Lino Junior, Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

    Tropical Pathology and Public Health Institute, Federal University of Goias, Goiania, Goias, Brazil

Downloads

Published

2024-11-30