Literature DB >> 32459768

Breast Implant Imaging Surveillance among U.S. Plastic Surgeons: U.S. Food and Drug Administration Recommendations versus Clinical Reality.

Logan W Carr1, John Roberts1, Alex F Mericli1, Jun Liu1, Elsa M Arribas1, Mark W Clemens1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Device rupture is considered a major complication associated with breast implants. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommends magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance 3 years after implantation and then every 2 years, but adherence to these recommendations is poor. The authors identified current practice management for breast implant rupture surveillance by surveying practicing U.S. plastic surgeons.
METHODS: An online survey of all active members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons was performed. Questions analyzed imaging practice patterns related to breast implants. Logistic regression models were used to analyze determinants for radiographic imaging in breast implant patients.
RESULTS: The survey had a response rate of 16.5 percent. For patients with breast implants, 37.7 percent of respondents recommended MRI at the recommended intervals. Fifty-five percent perform imaging only if there is a problem with the implant. Academic surgeons more frequently recommended MRI (56.3 percent and 39.3 percent; p = 0.0002). Surgeons with less than 5 years of experience are four times more likely to order MRI than surgeons with over 25 years' experience (60.8 percent and 28.1 percent; p < 0.0001). Furthermore, lower volume surgeons recommend significantly more MRI (45.2 percent and 27.3 percent; p = 0.001). Respondents are almost two times more likely to recommend MRI in reconstructive versus cosmetic patients (51.2 percent and 35.6 percent; p = 0.0004).
CONCLUSIONS: MRI limitations include high costs, time commitments, and equipment constraints. Fewer than 40 percent of survey respondents suggest the recommended screening frequency to their patients; however, academic, low-volume, early-career surgeons are more likely to recommend MRI implant monitoring. Screening recommendations need to be evidence based and align with common practices to prevent undue system, provider, and patient burden.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32459768     DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000006812

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


  3 in total

1.  Safety and Effectiveness of Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implants in Primary Augmentation Patients.

Authors:  Daniel Maxwell; Megan Estes; Jennifer McMillen Walcott; John W Canady; Tina D Hunter; Larry Gache; Bernadette Wang-Ashraf; Diane Alexander
Journal:  Aesthet Surg J       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 4.283

Review 2.  [Understanding Silicone Breast Implant-Associated Complications for Radiologists].

Authors:  Jeongmin Lee; Sung Hun Kim; Jae Hee Lee; Boo Kyung Han
Journal:  Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe Chi       Date:  2021-01-31

3.  The Value of Ultrasound in the Evaluation of the Integrity of Silicone Breast Implants.

Authors:  Dalia Rukanskienė; Greta Bytautaitė; Agnė Česnauskaitė; Loreta Pilipaitytė; Tautrimas Aštrauskas; Eglė Jonaitienė
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 2.430

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.