Literature DB >> 9869129

The life span of silicone gel breast implants and a comparison of mammography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting implant rupture: a meta-analysis.

C M Goodman1, V Cohen, J Thornby, D Netscher.   

Abstract

Because of the growing concern surrounding the integrity and life span of silicone gel breast implants and the reported variations in the diagnostic accuracy of various imaging techniques in identifying ruptured implants, the authors undertook a meta-analysis of articles in the scientific literature to examine these concerns. They were able to include reports from the literature that detailed the condition and removal of 1,099 breast implants during the past 7 years. The median life span of a silicone gel implant was estimated to be 16.4 years. Of the implants, 79.1% were intact at 10 years, falling to 48.7% by 15 years. The sensitivities and specificities of three imaging modalities used in the diagnosis of implant rupture (mammography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) were also evaluated and compared statistically in an effort to discover which of the three techniques might serve as the most reliable screening tool in the diagnosis of gel implant rupture. The sensitivity of mammography for finding a ruptured implant is 28.4% with a specificity of 92.9%. Ultrasonography has a sensitivity and specificity of 59.0% and 76.8% respectively compared with MRI, which was 78.1% and 80.0% respectively. For implants in place for 10 years, one would need to image 3.3 implants by ultrasound to identify a single possible rupture. However, because of the 76.8% specificity, 8.1 implants would need to be imaged to find a confirmed intraoperative rupture. This was similar to MRI, in which 3.1 implants would need to be imaged to detect one suspected rupture, and 6.1 implants would need to be imaged to find one intraoperatively confirmed rupture. The authors do not recommend either ultrasound or MRI as a screening tool based on their meta-analysis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9869129     DOI: 10.1097/00000637-199812000-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Plast Surg        ISSN: 0148-7043            Impact factor:   1.539


  10 in total

1.  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

2.  Incidence of Internal Mammary Lymph Nodes with Silicone Breast Implants at MR Imaging after Oncoplastic Surgery.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Sutton; Elizabeth J Watson; Girard Gibbons; Debra A Goldman; Chaya S Moskowitz; Maxine S Jochelson; D David Dershaw; Elizabeth A Morris
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  Breast MR imaging in women at high-risk of breast cancer. Is something changing in early breast cancer detection?

Authors:  Francesco Sardanelli; Franca Podo
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-09-29       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Assessment of Risk Factors for Rupture in Breast Reconstruction Patients with Macrotextured Breast Implants.

Authors:  Guido Paolini; Guido Firmani; Francesca Briganti; Mattia Macino; Simone Nigrelli; Michail Sorotos; Fabio Santanelli di Pompeo
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2022-10-13       Impact factor: 2.708

5.  A Surgeon's Empirical Perspectives on Use of High-resolution Ultrasound in Preoperatively Detecting a Rupture in the Context of Breast Implant Crisis in Korea.

Authors:  Bum Sik Bang; Seong Hoon Jung; Eun Kyoung Lee; Jung Youp Sung; Keun Yeong Song; Young Bum Yoo; Dong Wook Park; Jeong Eun Sohn; Jae Hong Kim
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 2.708

6.  Dual-energy CT for the evaluation of silicone breast implants.

Authors:  Thorsten R C Johnson; Isabelle Himsl; Karin Hellerhoff; Doris Mayr; Dorothea Rjosk-Dendorfer; Nina Ditsch; Bernhard Krauss; Klaus Friese; Maximilian F Reiser; Miriam S Lenhard
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-10-13       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Correlation between MRI results and intraoperative findings in patients with silicone breast implants.

Authors:  Nicole Lindenblatt; Karem El-Rabadi; Thomas H Helbich; Heinrich Czembirek; Maria Deutinger; Heike Benditte-Klepetko
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2014-07-30

8.  Radiological pitfall: Siliconoma in internal mammary lymph node mimics breast cancer recurrence.

Authors:  Karen Steinke; Phillipa Brook; Olivier Ramuz
Journal:  Radiol Case Rep       Date:  2015-11-06

9.  Intact intracranial breast prosthesis: a 28-year CT follow-up after treatment of late hemispherectomy complications.

Authors:  V Sorano; M Telesca; F Pediconi; D Bova; F Guidetti
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 1.475

10.  Dual-Energy CT for Evaluation of Intra- and Extracapsular Silicone Implant Rupture.

Authors:  Katrina N Glazebrook; Shuai Leng; Steven R Jacobson; Cynthia M McCollough
Journal:  Case Rep Radiol       Date:  2016-01-28
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.