Candidates with microtia, breast atrophy, mild breast sagging, breast asymmetry, tumor removal and various reasons for breast deficiency often ask their plastic surgeon during the interview: they hope to achieve a natural breast appearance and good handfeel after breast augmentation. So, is it better to choose breast implants or breast augmentation with autologous fat? This is a question that is troubling almost every candidate. We will not focus on their advantages and disadvantages here, because for breast augmentation surgery, the choice of which method depends more on personal conditions, there is no best, only the most suitable method for you. Due to the continuous improvement and rapid development of autologous fat breast augmentation technology, a new technique – autologous fat breast augmentation combined with prosthesis – has emerged in recent years. Its essence lies in the combination of effective breast volume increase by implant augmentation and further reshaping of breast appearance and optimization of handfeel by autologous fat. In 2013, Auclair et al. published an article in the journal PRS, showing us a picture of future trends in surgical approaches to breast augmentation, of which autologous fat combined with implant augmentation is a large part.Auclair et al. first started using fat grafting in cases of breast implants with exposed edges in 2006, and then started using it routinely in breast augmentation, and in 2009 and Auclair and Anavekar reported 190 cases in which fat injections were used mainly in the upper pole and medial aspect of the breast, and concluded that these were the areas most prone to unsatisfactory appearance in breast implant augmentation, and that the location of the injection port was chosen at the inframammary fold and medial edge of the areola, with attention to the glandular volume, nipple-areola complex, and symmetry of the inframammary fold. In their study, the majority of candidates were satisfied with the postoperative breast appearance, with only 2.5% of candidates needing stage II fat filler because of significant marginal contour. The mean volume of fat grafted for breast injections in this study was 125 ml. the authors concluded that while the selection of a suitable breast implant can also lead to satisfactory augmentation results, combined autologous fat grafting can improve the lesser defects in implant augmentation by giving a more natural shape, more pronounced cleavage, and providing a better feel. A 2015 article published in the journal PRS by Bravo et al. also conducted a study on the improvement of cleavage results with breast implants combined with autologous fat grafting. He divided the cases into two groups; 38 cases in group 1 were implant augmentation alone and 21 cases in group 2 were implant augmentation combined with autologous fat grafting, with 60 to 140 mI of fat injected in the medial side of the breast on top of the implant. At a follow-up of at least 1 year after surgery, the medial breast spacing was (2.26±I.24) cm in group 1 and (0.60±0.32) cm in group 2. Thus, the combined treatment had a definitive effect on the shaping of the cleavage. In cases of bilateral breast asymmetry, which is usually difficult to adjust with implants, the combination with fat grafting can achieve very satisfactory results. The aim of this combined technique is to increase the coverage of the prosthesis near the sternal margin, to reduce the undesirable phenomenon of exposed prosthesis edges and partially restricted breast movement, especially for candidates with thin body types, and to allow a certain degree of adjustment of the asymmetry or selection of the prosthesis. It also reminds that the purpose of applying this technique is to cover the marginal contour of the breast and not to focus solely on the increase in breast volume and projection. Autologous fat augmentation combined with implant augmentation, which combines the advantages of both implants and autologous fat augmentation, may become a major trend in breast surgery in the future.