Literature DB >> 17898620

Magnetic resonance imaging and explantation investigation of long-term silicone gel implant integrity.

Nick Collis1, Janet Litherland, David Enion, David T Sharpe.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Information about silicone gel implant longevity is sparse. Magnetic resonance imaging studies have superseded explantation studies in the search for data on their long-term integrity. Unfortunately, the majority of studies are based predominantly on second-generation implant cohorts. Although magnetic resonance imaging is acknowledged to be the best imaging modality, the results of any study are entirely dependent on its ability to differentiate ruptured from intact implants.
METHODS: A single, textured, third-generation implant type was chosen, to reduce the number of variables. The largest cohort of patients in our database had subglandular Mentor Siltex gel implants (Mentor Medical Systems, Santa Barbara, Calif.). They were contacted and offered a magnetic resonance imaging scan. All patients with at least one radiologically ruptured implant were then offered explantation.
RESULTS: One hundred forty-nine patients with bilateral subglandular implants (median +/- SD age, 8.9 +/- 2.3; range, 4.8 to 13.5 years) were imaged and reported by two independent radiologists. Twenty-three patients were reported to have 33 radiologically ruptured implants. Twenty-one patients (30 radiologically ruptured implants) agreed to explantation. Statistical analysis using maximum likelihood estimation of survival curve for cross-sectional data suggests that implant rupture starts at 6 to 7 years and that by 13 years approximately 11.8 percent of implants will have ruptured.
CONCLUSION: Although these results cannot necessarily be extrapolated to other implant types and manufacturers, they provide further information about the natural history of implant integrity, better enabling us to counsel prospective and current implant recipients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17898620     DOI: 10.1097/01.prs.0000279374.99503.89

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  7 in total

1.  PIP breast implants: rupture rate and correlation with breast cancer.

Authors:  M Moschetta; M Telegrafo; I Cornacchia; L Vincenti; V Ranieri; A Cirili; L Rella; A A Stabile Ianora; G Angelelli
Journal:  G Chir       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec

Review 2.  Silicone breast implant rupture: a review.

Authors:  Christopher Hillard; Jason D Fowler; Ruth Barta; Bruce Cunningham
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2017-04

Review 3.  The effect of study design biases on the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for detecting silicone breast implant ruptures: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jae W Song; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Lillian T Bellfi; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.730

4.  Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP) incidence of rupture: a retrospective MR analysis in 64 patients.

Authors:  Mariella Scotto di Santolo; Bianca Cusati; Alfonso Ragozzino; Nicoletta Dell'Aprovitola; Alessandra Acquaviva; Michele Altiero; Antonello Accurso; Albina Riccardi; Massimo Imbriaco
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2014-12

5.  Prospective Study of Saline versus Silicone Gel Implants for Subpectoral Breast Augmentation.

Authors:  Eric Swanson
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2020-06-04

Review 6.  Hepatobiliary complications from ruptured silicone breast implants - a comprehensive literature review.

Authors:  Joshua Agilinko; Dharshanan Raj; Ken Vin Wong; Daniele Fanelli; Nicklaus Ng; Bertrand Agilinko; Mohammad Hasan
Journal:  Ger Med Sci       Date:  2021-05-25

7.  Becker Implant Intracapsular Rupture with Contralateral Axillary Silicone Lymphadenopathy in an Asymptomatic Patient: A Case Report and Literature Review.

Authors:  Scott A Kreitzberg; Daniel Sherbert; Jeffrey DeSano
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-04-11
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.