OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the value of MR imaging with a silicone-selective pulse sequence for detecting leakage from silicone breast implants. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Women with silicone breast implants were referred for this study on the basis of clinical or imaging findings suggestive of implant rupture. Twenty-eight patients with 38 implants were examined with silicone-selective MR imaging and also underwent surgical removal of the studied implant. All but four also had mammography before MR imaging. Results of silicone-selective MR imaging for the detection of silicone leakage were compared with mammographic and surgical findings. Surgical proof was considered the gold standard. RESULTS: Silicone-selective MR imaging showed an apparently intact implant in 21 cases; 20 of these were found to be intact at surgery. Silicone-selective MR imaging showed evidence of leakage in 17 implants, all of which showed leakage at surgery. The sensitivity for detection of leakage was 94%; the specificity was 100%. The findings of silicone-selective MR imaging and mammography were in agreement in 30 of 34 cases in which both studies were performed. In the four cases of disagreement, surgical findings agreed with MR findings in three and with mammographic findings in one. When the findings of mammography and silicone-selective MR imaging were combined, the correct status (leakage or no leakage) of all implants examined was determinable. CONCLUSION: Silicone-selective MR imaging is highly effective for detecting leakage from silicone breast implants. Accuracy is improved when mammographic and MR findings are considered together.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the value of MR imaging with a silicone-selective pulse sequence for detecting leakage from silicone breast implants. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Women with silicone breast implants were referred for this study on the basis of clinical or imaging findings suggestive of implant rupture. Twenty-eight patients with 38 implants were examined with silicone-selective MR imaging and also underwent surgical removal of the studied implant. All but four also had mammography before MR imaging. Results of silicone-selective MR imaging for the detection of silicone leakage were compared with mammographic and surgical findings. Surgical proof was considered the gold standard. RESULTS:Silicone-selective MR imaging showed an apparently intact implant in 21 cases; 20 of these were found to be intact at surgery. Silicone-selective MR imaging showed evidence of leakage in 17 implants, all of which showed leakage at surgery. The sensitivity for detection of leakage was 94%; the specificity was 100%. The findings of silicone-selective MR imaging and mammography were in agreement in 30 of 34 cases in which both studies were performed. In the four cases of disagreement, surgical findings agreed with MR findings in three and with mammographic findings in one. When the findings of mammography and silicone-selective MR imaging were combined, the correct status (leakage or no leakage) of all implants examined was determinable. CONCLUSION:Silicone-selective MR imaging is highly effective for detecting leakage from silicone breast implants. Accuracy is improved when mammographic and MR findings are considered together.