Textured breast implants appeared on the American breast implant market scene in the early ‘90’s. The theory that was proposed at that time was that the texturing (little bumps on the surface of the implants) would cause the body to form a scar around each one of these little bumps. Theoretically, these individual scars would be a random pattern, would not line up, and this would then avoid a circumferential capsular contracture that is commonly referred to as a “hard breast”.
One of the primary reasons for capsular contracture, i.e. hard breast, is non-pathogenic bacteria, usually from the skin that gets around an implant during surgery and sets up what is called a bio-film. The body’s response to this bio-film is to lay down collagen and cells called myofibroblasts to protect the individual from this bacteria. This added collagen contracts around an implant to cause it to become a hard breast.
The above article documents a fact that I have known for a long time – that textured implants, because of their texturing, hide more non-pathogenic bacteria, therefore leading to more, not less capsular contractures. This is just the outcome that texturing was supposed to prevent. That is to say, textured implants have a greater propensity for capsular contracture than smooth-walled breast implants.
It is my personal theory that the texturing placed on silicone implants was an attempt by the manufacturers to mimic the fuzzy covering of the polyurethane implants which were the most popular implants during the ‘80’s. It was a misunderstanding, in my opinion, because it was not the fuzzy covering that made polyurethane implants soft. The covering was quickly incorporated into the capsule around the implant, and this being an irritant, led to serous fluid being released which bathe the silicone implant devoid of polyurethane in a fluid bath. This is what truly led to the soft feeling of polyurethane implants.