Implant Comparison
Motiva vs Mentor Breast Implants: Side-by-Side Comparison
This article compares Motiva (Establishment Labs) and Mentor (Johnson & Johnson) breast implants on shell surface, gel and fill, published complication data, imaging follow-up and warranty. Each figure is linked to a study in the reference list, along with that study's design and follow-up length. The goal is to help you understand the trade-offs, not to crown a winner. At UNE Plastic Surgery in Korea we use round implants from both brands, and the final choice is made after an in-person assessment.
1. Shell Surface
| Implant Line | Surface | What the Studies Describe |
|---|---|---|
| Motiva SmoothSilk (SilkSurface), including Ergonomix | Finely textured; classified as smooth under ISO 14607 | Made by 3D negative imprinting, without projecting salt or sugar crystals onto the shell. Reported average roughness is about 3 to 4 micrometers.[1,2] The U.S. FDA approved SmoothSilk Round and Ergonomix implants for primary and revision breast augmentation in September 2024.[8] |
| Mentor MemoryGel and MemoryGel Xtra (smooth, round) | Smooth | Single-lumen round silicone shell filled with cohesive silicone gel. MemoryGel was approved by the U.S. FDA in 2006, and its Core Study followed patients for 10 years.[3] |
Motiva describes SmoothSilk as a nanosurface. Independent authors have pointed out that its surface features measure around 16 micrometers, which makes the "nano" label somewhat misleading, while noting that these irregularities are at least 10 times smaller than the textures of competing manufacturers' implants.[4]
2. Gel and Fill
The gel, and how completely the shell is filled, affect shape, softness and how an implant behaves when you move:
- Motiva Ergonomix (ProgressiveGel Ultima): a round implant that combines a low-viscosity, highly elastic silicone gel with an elastic shell. It is designed so that the point of maximum projection shifts toward the lower pole when you stand and moves back toward the middle of the breast when you lie flat.[1,4]
- Motiva ProgressiveGel Plus: the gel introduced with the second generation of Motiva implants; the 2023 review lists the SilkSurface Plus round implant as a second-generation device.[1]
- Mentor MemoryGel: a single-lumen round silicone shell filled with cohesive silicone gel.[3]
- Mentor MemoryGel Xtra: designed to keep the soft, natural feel of MemoryGel while increasing fullness and projection through an optimized shell gel fill, which is also intended to reduce wrinkling and rippling.[5]
None of the studies cited here compared softness between Motiva and Mentor directly. Feel also depends on your own soft-tissue coverage and on the implant size relative to your chest, so we judge it in person, with your measurements in front of us.
3. Capsular Contracture: What the Studies Report
None of the studies below compared Motiva and Mentor head to head, and they differ in design, sponsor and length of follow-up. With numbers like these, the first thing to check is how long each study actually followed its patients, because the cumulative rate rises with time: in the Mentor Core Study it went from 8.1% at 3 years to 12.1% at 10 years.[3,6]
- Mentor MemoryGel, Core Study (prospective, multicenter, sponsored by Mentor): among 551 primary augmentation patients, the Baker grade III/IV capsular contracture rate was 8.1% at 3 years.[6] In the final 10-year report, the Kaplan-Meier cumulative rate for 552 primary augmentation patients was 12.1%, with 57% of that cohort still in follow-up at 10 years.[3]
- Mentor MemoryGel Xtra (prospective, multicenter, funded by Johnson & Johnson via Mentor): among 151 primary augmentation patients, the 3-year Kaplan-Meier rate of Baker grade III/IV capsular contracture was 1.5%, with 3-year data available for 80.7% of that cohort.[5]
- Motiva SilkSurface, 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis (13 studies, 4,784 patients): capsular contracture was reported in 26 patients (0.54%), with rates from 0% to 2.06% across individual studies. Follow-up ranged from 4.2 to 72 months, 10 of the 13 studies were retrospective, and 8 had manufacturer funding or an author with a financial interest in the manufacturer. Seven of the 13 studies came from Korea. The authors conclude that larger, multicenter, prospective studies with longer follow-up are still needed.[1]
- Motiva U.S. clinical trial, reported by the manufacturer at FDA approval: 451 primary augmentation patients followed for 3 years, with capsular contracture in 0.5% and rupture in 0.6% of the MRI cohort (176 patients). These figures come from the company announcement.[8]
- Motiva SilkSurface and VelvetSurface, single-center series (retrospective, 5,813 consecutive patients): no Baker grade III/IV capsular contracture was reported in primary cases, and the overall complication rate was 0.76%. Follow-up was at least 12 months, with a mean of about 23 months, and the series included the rougher VelvetSurface as well as SilkSurface. The lead author disclosed a consulting agreement and a share option grant with Establishment Labs, which also supported the article; the 2023 review advises that manufacturer-sponsored results be interpreted with caution.[1,2]
Capsular contracture risk also depends on more than the implant. It has been linked to bacterial colonization, the surgical approach and previous radiation, and in the Mentor Core Study the 10-year rate was higher after revision augmentation (24.4%) than after primary augmentation (12.1%).[3,4]
4. Rupture and Imaging Surveillance
For silicone gel-filled implants, the U.S. FDA recommends that patients without symptoms have their first ultrasound or MRI screening for silent rupture 5-6 years after surgery, then every 2-3 years thereafter. If you have symptoms, or an ultrasound result is uncertain, an MRI is recommended.[7]
Screening matters because most ruptures are silent and tend to appear later. In the Mentor Core Study, 75 of 77 ruptured implants in the original MRI cohort were silent ruptures, the mean time to rupture was 7.9 years, and the authors note that rupture rates tend to increase around 6 to 10 years after implantation. The same study reported a 10-year Kaplan-Meier rupture rate (suspected or confirmed) of 24.2% for primary augmentation patients in that MRI cohort; the authors caution that their strict definition may overestimate it, and the rate counting only ruptures confirmed at explantation was 9.81%.[3]
For Motiva SilkSurface, the 2023 review found a single rupture across its 4,784 patients.[1] Follow-up in those studies did not go beyond 72 months, so they do not yet cover much of the 6 to 10 year period in which the Mentor data show rupture rates rising.[1,3] The FDA schedule is written for all silicone gel-filled breast implants, so it applies to both brands.[7]
5. Warranty and Implant Traceability
Both Motiva and Mentor run warranty programs for their implants. The terms vary by region, product line and year, and they are revised over time, so we confirm the current terms for your specific implant at consultation rather than quoting them here.
Keep the implant information you receive after surgery. The FDA recommends a patient device card for breast implants, which are subject to U.S. medical device tracking requirements.[7] Establishment Labs also offers Q Inside Safety Technology, a radio-frequency identification (RFID) device embedded in the implant that transmits product information when read with an RFID reader. The 2023 review notes that it has been debated because of artifacts during screening of high-risk cancer patients and possible patient confidentiality issues.[1] If this matters to you, ask whether the specific implant planned for you includes it.
6. Matching the Implant to the Patient
These are the questions I work through with each patient. The middle column shows what the cited studies actually say; none of it is a rule that one brand fits one body type.
| Patient Profile | What the Studies Say | How It Shapes the Plan |
|---|---|---|
| Thin skin or limited soft-tissue coverage | The authors of the Mentor-funded MemoryGel Xtra study write that, in their experience, Xtra is particularly useful for thin skin envelopes or limited soft-tissue coverage.[5] | Coverage is assessed in person, and implant size and pocket are planned around it before brand. |
| Breast sagging or loose skin | In an independent series of 100 Ergonomix augmentations, the authors advise caution with smoother implants such as Ergonomix in ptotic breasts with considerable skin excess, and they recommend fixing the inframammary fold in all Ergonomix patients.[4] Expert consensus on SilkSurface implants favors limited pocket dissection.[1] | Smooth-surface implants depend on a precise pocket. With loose skin, the plan may need to include a lift. |
| Wants long-term published data | Mentor MemoryGel has final 10-year prospective Core Study results.[3] Among the Motiva studies in the 2023 review, follow-up reached 72 months in one prospective study of 35 patients.[1] | If long-term data weighs heavily for you, we discuss this difference openly. |
| Previous capsular contracture or revision surgery | Revision operations carry higher capsular contracture rates than first operations: 24.4% vs 12.1% at 10 years in the Mentor Core Study.[3] | The revision plan, including capsule and pocket management, matters as much as the implant brand. |
| Wants more fullness and projection | MemoryGel Xtra was designed to add fullness and projection.[5] Ergonomix was designed so that its point of maximum projection shifts lower when upright.[1,4] | Profile and projection are chosen from chest measurements and the look you want. |
7. Cost Difference
The implant brand is one part of the total cost. The 2023 review lists the higher cost of Motiva implants as one possible reason for their limited adoption.[1] Prices change over time, so we quote the total for your specific plan, including the implant, surgical complexity, anesthesia and follow-up, at consultation.
8. Bottom Line
There is no single best implant. Mentor MemoryGel has a longer record of published prospective follow-up. Motiva SmoothSilk has a finely textured, smooth-classified surface and low reported capsular contracture rates, based on shorter and mostly retrospective studies. The choice should follow your chest dimensions (chest width, breast base width), soft-tissue coverage, skin elasticity, activity level and the feel and shape you want. A board-certified plastic surgeon should assess these in person before recommending a brand, line, profile and volume.
References
- Aitzetmüller-Klietz ML, Yang S, Wiebringhaus P, Wellenbrock S, Öztürk M, Kückelhaus M, Hirsch T, Aitzetmüller-Klietz MM. Complication Rates after Breast Surgery with the Motiva Smooth Silk Surface Silicone Gel Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med. 2023;12(5):1881. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12051881
- Sforza M, Zaccheddu R, Alleruzzo A, Seno A, Mileto D, Paganelli A, Sulaiman H, Payne M, Maurovich-Horvat L. Preliminary 3-Year Evaluation of Experience With SilkSurface and VelvetSurface Motiva Silicone Breast Implants: A Single-Center Experience With 5813 Consecutive Breast Augmentation Cases. Aesthet Surg J. 2018;38(suppl_2):S62-S73. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjx150
- Caplin DA, Calobrace MB, Wixtrom RN, Estes MM, Canady JW. MemoryGel Breast Implants: Final Safety and Efficacy Results after 10 Years of Follow-Up. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;147(3):556-566. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000007635
- Huemer GM, Wenny R, Aitzetmüller MM, Duscher D. Motiva Ergonomix Round SilkSurface Silicone Breast Implants: Outcome Analysis of 100 Primary Breast Augmentations over 3 Years and Technical Considerations. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(6):831e-842e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004367
- Alderman A, Caplin D, Hammond DC, Keane A, Turetzky J, Kane WJ. Clinical Results of Mentor MemoryGel Xtra Breast Implants From the GLOW Clinical Trial. Aesthet Surg J. 2023;43(12):NP1021-NP1032. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjad272
- Katzel EB, Parker TH III, Janis JE, Hammond DC. Breast Augmentation. In: Janis JE, ed. Essentials of Aesthetic Surgery. New York: Thieme; 2018. Box 52-1, p. 745.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Breast Implants: Certain Labeling Recommendations to Improve Patient Communication. Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff. Issued September 29, 2020 (Docket FDA-2019-D-4467).
- Establishment Labs. Establishment Labs Receives U.S. FDA Approval for Motiva Implants. Press release, September 26, 2024. investors.establishmentlabs.com
Medical disclaimer. This article is general information and does not constitute medical diagnosis or treatment advice. Results vary with individual tissue condition and body type; accurate diagnosis and surgical planning are determined through in-person consultation with a board-certified plastic surgeon.
Dr. Kim Uigeon (Board-certified plastic surgeon, Republic of Korea · UNE Plastic Surgery)