Silicone gel-filled breast implant integrity: a retrospective review of 478 consecutively explanted implants

Atypical Chest Pain in a Patient With Breast Implant

Breast implant surgery typically improves patient breast satisfaction and health-related quality of life. However, breast implants are also linked to long-term local problems like capsular contracture and breast discomfort. Chest pain is one of the reasons that patients with breast implants seek consultations, which is not typically attributable to cardiovascular reasons. The potential reasons for atypical chest pain are diverse. The absence of a precise diagnosis may also result in incorrect examinations and management, leading to further worry and wasted work time. A 55-year-old woman with a breast implant 10 years prior to the incident, presented with atypical chest pain on and off for a year and was treated as a case of unstable angina, costochondritis, and vasospastic spasm. Despite multiple visits, her symptoms did not resolve. Later, the patient presented with a lump over the left breast, associated with constitutional symptoms. Examination revealed a left breast implant with capsular contracture grade III, and ultrasonography showed signs of a ruptured implant. Symptoms eventually resolved after the removal of the breast implant.

Silicone Breast Implant Rupture is More Prevalent in the Dominant Limb Side, A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Breast implant rupture is associated with multiple risk factors such as implant age, manufacturer, and a history of trauma to the breast. However, the exact mechanism of breast implant rupture remains unclear. We hypothesize that repetitive minor mechanical forces on the implant collectively play a significant role in the cascade that eventually leads to its rupture. Therefore, we expect a more significant cumulative effect on the breast implant in the dominant upper limb side. Thus, we aim to ascertain whether laterality in silicone breast implant rupture is associated with the dominant upper limb.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients with silicone breast implants who underwent an elective breast implant removal or exchange. All patients had breast augmentations for cosmetic reasons. We collected data on implant rupture laterality and limb dominance together with known risk factors like patient age, implant age, implant pocket, and implant volume.

RESULTS

A total of 154 patients with unilateral implant rupture were included in the study. Among patients with a dominant right limb (n = 133), an ipsilateral rupture was found in 77 patients (58%) (p = 0.036), while in patients with a left dominant limb (n = 21), an ipsilateral rupture was found in 14 patients (67%), (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

The dominant limb was a significant risk factor for ipsilateral breast implant rupture. The prevailing theory that cyclic envelope movement carries an increased rupture risk is reinforced in this study. Extensive prospective studies are needed to clarify risk factors for implant rupture further.

Silicone Granulomas of the Eyelids-A Case Series Illustrating a Distant Migratory Phenomenon

PURPOSE

Exogenous silicone has been reported to migrate to anatomic sights far from an initial injection or implantation site; this phenomenon has been rarely described in the ocular adnexa, especially in the eyelids. We document 3 additional cases of distant migration of silicone implanted elsewhere in the body to the eyelids and review the prior literature on this uncommon event.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 3 patients was conducted along with analysis of diagnostic histopathology. A comprehensive review of the literature regarding dissemination or migration of silicone to the eyelids in patients with either silicone breast implants or silicone facial filler use was performed.

RESULTS

Cases of silicone migrating to the eyelids from silicone breast implants and silicone-based facial filler are outlined in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. There are 4 total reports of women with silicone breast implants, including the 2 described here, with evidence of migration of silicone to the eyelid. Similarly, 5 cases of silicone-based facial filler with resultant migration of filler to the eyelids were identified, including 2 of the cases presented in this report (1 patient had both silicone breast implants and silicone facial filler).

CONCLUSION

Silicone is chemically inert, but is known to travel throughout the body, causing a resultant foreign body response in tissue that can adversely affect even the eyelids. Silicone has a relatively characteristic histologic appearance and diagnosis of silicone granuloma highlights the importance of obtaining a thorough clinical history, particularly regarding prior cosmetic injections or breast enhancement surgery. Foreign material/foreign body granuloma is important to consider in patients with deep eyelid nodules of unclear etiology.

Comprehensive Comparison Between Shaped Versus Round Implants for Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic breast reconstruction has been gaining popularity and a variety of implant options are currently available. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the safety and efficacy of newly developed shaped implants compared with those of conventional round implants. To date, few studies have investigated the outcomes of breast reconstruction with shaped versus round implants.

OBJECTIVES

The present study aimed to comprehensively compare, via meta-analytic methodology, shaped and round breast implant reconstruction in terms of complication profiles and aesthetic satisfaction.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify relevant studies presenting the complication rates for shaped and round implant groups. The relative risks of the following complications between the groups were calculated: infection, seroma, capsular contracture, rupture, rippling, reconstruction failure, and implant exchange or removal. Outcomes of aesthetic satisfaction included aesthetic results and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of 8 retrospective cohort studies, representing 2490 cases of implant-based breast reconstruction, was performed. There were no significant differences in the risks of infection, seroma, capsular contracture, and reconstruction failure between the 2 groups. The risks of implant rupture and rippling were significantly reduced with shaped implants. In a subgroup analysis of shaped/textured and round/smooth implants, the risk of infection was significantly enhanced in the former, whereas incidences of other complications, including capsular contracture and reconstruction failure, were similar. Aesthetic satisfaction analysis of the 2 groups demonstrated similar outcome scores with favorable overall results.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that both shaped and round implants might provide favorable breast reconstruction outcomes with similarly low complication rates and aesthetic results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Sub-muscular plane for augmentation mammoplasty patients increases silicone gel implant rupture rate

BACKGROUND

Breast augmentation is one of the most common aesthetic procedures performed worldwide. One of the worst associated complications is implant rupture, a topic that will be addressed in the present study. The risk of developing silicone gel breast implant rupture following breast augmentation is associated with multiple factors, including: older generation implant, increased implant age, implant type, specific manufacturer, severe capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV), and the presence of local symptoms. We hypothesize that the plane of the implant placement may also play a role in the development of implant rupture due to differences in opposing forces upon the implant between submuscular and subglandular planes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of potential risk factors on breast prosthesis rupture rate, focusing on implant pocket selection, capsular contracture and implant volume.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients with silicone breast implants in either subglandular or submuscular plane, who underwent an elective breast implant exchange, with or without mastopexy, between January 2012 and June 2017. Data collected included patient's age, implant age, implant pocket, implant volume, capsular contracture grade, and implant status (ruptured or intact).

RESULTS

Data was collected on 362 women (700 breasts). A total of 284 women (542 breasts) met the inclusion criteria. The average age of the subjects was 43.4 ± 10.4 years. Average implant age during exchange was 10 ± 6.1. There was no difference between the characteristics of the submuscular group and the subglandular group, except from patient age. In a univariant analysis, patient's age (46.4 vs. 41.8, p < 0.001) and implant age (12.2 vs. 8.92 years, p < 0.001) were associated with significantly higher rupture rate. Among ruptured implants, the relative proportion of submuscular to subglandular implants was 64%, compared to 48% among non-ruptured implants (p < 0.0001). When controlling for potential confounders, submuscular pocket (OR = 0.1835, CI95% 1.25-2.69, p = 0.002) as well as implant size (OR = 1.004, CI95% 1.001-1.007, p = 0.005) were found to be a risk factor for implant rupture.

CONCLUSION

A sub-muscular implant pocket was identified as a significant risk factor for implant rupture. The prevailing theory that larger size implant carries an increased risk of complications, is also reinforced in this study. Large prospective studies are needed to further clarify risk factors for implant rupture.

Poly Implants Prosthèse Breast Implants: A Case Series and Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Silicone breast implants from the French manufacturer Poly Implants Prosthèse (PIP) were recalled from the European market after the French regulator has revealed the implants contain non-medical-grade silicone filler. In December 2011, following a large increase in reported rupture rate and a possible cancer risk, the French Ministry of Health recommended consideration of the PIP explantation, regardless of their condition. In 2012, the Israel Ministry of Health recommended to replace the implants only upon suspected implant rupture.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to characterize breast-augmented Israeli patients with PIP implants, compare their outcomes with those of breast-augmented patients with different implant types, and review the current PIP literature.

METHODS

Breast-augmented patients who underwent an elective breast implant exchange in Israel between January 2011 and January 2017 were included in the study. Data were collected from electronic and physical medical files.

RESULTS

There were 73 breast-augmented female patients with 146 PIP breast implants included in this study. Average implant age was 6.7 ± 2.79 years. Mean implant size was 342.8 ± 52.9 mL. Fourteen women (19 implants [16%]) had a high-grade capsular contracture (Baker grade 3-4). During exchange, 28 implants were found to be ruptured (19.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Less than 10 years following breast augmentation, PIP implants demonstrated higher rupture rate compared with other implants. Our data are comparable to overall available rupture rate. Among patients with definitive rupture diagnosis, an elective implant removal should be recommended. In cases of undamaged implants, plastic surgeons should also seriously consider PIP implant explantation. When the patient does not desire to remove the implant, an annual physical examination and breast ultrasound are recommended, beginning a year after augmentation.

Risk factors for developing capsular contracture in women after breast implant surgery: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Capsular contracture is the most frequent complication in breast augmentation or reconstruction with breast implants. The exact mechanism for this complication is not completely understood. Yet, it is most likely to be a multifactorial condition. Several patient-, surgery-, and implant-specific risk factors have been related to cause capsular contracture. This review aims to provide a clear overview of all risk factors for capsular contracture.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed focusing on patient-, surgery-, and/or implant-related factors related to capsular contracture in breast implants. PubMed, Embase, and Wiley/Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles published from inception up to October 20, 2016. The included studies were assessed for the following main variables: study characteristics, patient characteristics, indication for surgery, type of surgery, implant characteristics, and other characteristics.

RESULTS

Data on the risk factors for the development of capsular contracture were retrieved from 40 studies. A presumptive increased risk in the development of capsular contracture is shown for the following variables: longer duration of follow-up, breast reconstructive surgery in patients with a history of breast cancer, subglandular implant placement, postoperative hematoma, and a textured implant surface. There is little, weak, or no evidence for the association of other factors with capsular contracture. This review also shows a large heterogeneity between studies and within the definition of capsular contracture.

CONCLUSION

This review provides an overview of the relationship between patient-, surgery-, and implant-specific risk factors in the development of capsular contracture.

Silicone breast implant rupture: a review

Silicone breast implants have been in use for nearly 6 decades. In this time they have undergone significant changes in design and use. They have been subject to intense scrutiny with regard to safety and efficacy, including an almost 10 years moratorium on their use. The current generations of implants have been followed via the manufacturer's Core studies in order to obtain long term data regarding safety and complications. The results of the more recent studies are compiled in this review. Rupture rates are initially very low and begin to increase after 6-8 years of implantation. Implant rupture may be detected by physical exam, ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The majority of silicone implant ruptures are clinically undetectable. Symptomatic patients may present with capsular contracture, breast lumps or changes in breast shape. The most common cause of implant rupture is instrument damage during placement. Implant rupture may be confined to the peri-prosthetic capsule or may extravasate into the breast tissue. Patients with ruptured implants have been studied closely and the consensus of the literature states there are no health risks associated with implant rupture. Symptomatic patients with ruptured implants should be offered the choice of observation, or explantation and capsulectomy with or without replacement.

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

Background

Silicone gel breast implants may silently rupture without detection. This has been the main reason for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the augmented or reconstructed breast. The aim of the present study was to investigate the accuracy of MRI for implant rupture.

Methods

Fifty consecutive patients with 85 silicone gel implants were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 51 (range 21–72) years, with a mean duration of implantation of 3.8 (range 1–28) years. All patients underwent clinical examination and breast MRI. Intraoperative implant rupture was diagnosed by the operating surgeon.

Results

Nineteen of the 50 patients suffered from clinical symptoms. An implant rupture was diagnosed by MRI in 22 of 85 implants (26%). In seven of 17 removed implants (41%), the intraoperative diagnosis corresponded with the positive MRI result. However, only 57% of these patients were symptomatic. Ultrasound imaging of the harvested implants showed signs of interrupted inner layers of the implant despite integrity of the outer shell. By microsurgical separation of the different layers of the implant shell, we were able to reproduce this phenomenon and to produce signs of implant rupture on MRI.

Conclusion

Our results show that rupture of only the inner layers of the implant shell with integrity of the outer shell leads to a misdiagnosis on MRI. Correlation with clinical symptoms and the specific wishes of the patient should guide the indication for implant removal.

Comparison of breast augmentation incisions and common complications

BACKGROUND

Incisions for insertion of breast implants are most commonly placed in the inframammary fold, areola, or axilla. Previous studies have evaluated selection of incision location preoperatively and for nipple-areola complex sensation retention after primary augmentation mammaplasty. This study compares the most common postoperative complications for each incision location in patients who underwent primary breast augmentation.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on 619 patients who underwent primary breast augmentation, excluding simultaneous mastopexy, within a single group practice from July 1994 to June 2009. Incision location, postoperative complications (capsular contracture, hematoma formation, rippling, infection, and rupture), and total reoperation rates were recorded. Incision locations were also compared with respect to implant fill type (saline or silicone gel) and pocket location (subglandular or submuscular).

RESULTS

A statistically significant association was identified between total reoperation and incision location (p = 0.0054). The highest rate of total reoperation occurred when using an inframammary fold incision compared to either the transaxillary or periareolar. This relationship with total reoperation was not attributed to the five complications analyzed, but rather with patient desire for size/style change, asymmetry, or ptosis. No statistically significant association was observed between incision location and specific complications such as capsular contracture, rippling, implant rupture, hematoma, or infection.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the five complications analyzed correlated with incision location. The data generated from this study will assure the surgeon that all three incision locations are safe. Preoperative examination, patient preference, and surgeon comfort should remain the mainstays of incision planning in augmentation mammaplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article.

A clinical study of late seroma in breast implantation surgery

BACKGROUND

The use of mammary implants may lead to a variety of early and delayed complications. The most common delayed complications are capsular contracture and implant failure. Late seroma has seldom been reported. In a long-term prospective observational study, cases of late seroma were assessed and recorded.

METHODS

Between March 2005 and November 2009, suspected cases of late seroma in patients who had undergone breast augmentation or reconstruction with textured implants were evaluated clinically and with instrumental analyses. An ultrasound-guided needle aspiration of the fluid was performed.

RESULTS

In this study, 13 cases of late seroma (8 augmentations and 5 reconstructions) were observed. The overall incidence of this complication was 1.68%. Chemical analyses confirmed the diagnosis of seroma, which recurred in all the patients within days of evacuation. For 12 patients, a reoperation was performed, during which the implant was removed, a total capsulectomy was performed, and in cases of subglandular breast augmentation, the implant pocket was changed to a submuscular placement before a new prosthesis was inserted. One patient underwent a second ultrasound-guided needle aspiration. No seroma recurrence was observed in any of the patients during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

In case of unexpected breast enlargement after prosthesis implantation, the physician should first rule out infection, then investigate possible friction irritation from either a fold in the device or rubbing of a textured implant. According to the authors' experience and another report, this complication occurs in 1% to 2% of cases. The inclusion of this complication in the informed consent form should be considered. Long-term studies designed to investigate the underlying causes of late seroma are warranted for the prevention and treatment of this complication.

Quality of life, patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome after breast reconstruction using DIEP flap or expandable breast implant

In a cross-sectional postal survey, we compared patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap or an expandable breast implant (EBI). We included 34 consecutive patients who had breast reconstruction with DIEP flap and 30 patients with EBI. Outcomes were assessed using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire, two study-specific patient satisfaction questionnaires and a visual analogue scale (VAS) on cosmetic result. There were no significant differences in SF-36 subscale scores between the two groups. On the study-specific questionnaire, more patients in the DIEP group were satisfied with the appearance of their breast (P<0.0005) and reported an improved social relationship (P=0.02), and fewer patients were sad about their body image (P=0.01) after reconstruction than in the EBI group. On the other study-specific items, satisfaction was similar in the two groups. On all five VAS items, DIEP patients reported better cosmetic results than EBI patients. We conclude that patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome were better after breast reconstruction with the DIEP flap compared with EBI, while there was no difference in health-related quality of life.

The Mentor Study on Contour Profile Gel Silicone MemoryGel Breast Implants

BACKGROUND

Two-year safety and efficacy data were presented to the Canadian Therapeutic Products Directorate Scientific Advisory Panel, in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

The 955 women enrolled in the 10-year, multicenter, Mentor MemoryGel study were distributed into four cohorts: 572 augmentation patients, 123 revision-augmentation patients, 191 reconstruction patients, and 69 revision-reconstruction patients. The surgeons in the study received an intensive clinical educational program in addition to the protocol.

RESULTS

Mentor's 2-year study results indicate that the risk of any complication or reoperation at some point through 2 years after implant surgery is 24.5 percent for primary augmentation patients, 30.2 percent for revision-augmentation patients, 42.9 percent for primary reconstruction patients, and 41.8 percent for revision-reconstruction patients. The rupture rates reported from the magnetic resonance imaging cohort were 0 percent for all groups. Patients reoperated on at least one time were as follows: 9.4 percent for primary augmentation, 12.8 percent for revision-augmentation, 27.3 percent for primary reconstruction, and 19.4 percent for revision-reconstruction. Also, 2.4 percent of primary augmentation patients, 7.3 percent of revision-augmentation patients, 8.9 percent of primary, and 11.6 percent of reconstruction patients had their implants removed, with patient choice and capsular contracture being the most common reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

The data from the Mentor CPG Gel Study resulted in approval of these implants for general use on October 20, 2006. The educational program resulted in improved clinical outcomes and probably should be required for all surgeons using the devices.

The Mentor Core Study on Silicone MemoryGel Breast Implants

BACKGROUND

In 2005, convincing safety and efficacy data were presented, resulting in the approval of Mentor MemoryGel Implants, with conditions.

METHODS

The 1007 women enrolled in the 10-year, multicenter, Mentor Core MemoryGel Study were distributed into four cohorts: 551 primary augmentation patients, 146 revision-augmentation patients, 251 primary reconstruction patients, and 59 revision-reconstruction patients. Preoperatively and postoperatively, study instruments and physical examinations were administered to assess medical history, patient satisfaction, quality of life and body image, connective tissue disease diagnosis, rheumatology symptoms, and chest size change to determine the efficacy of surgery.

RESULTS

Safety assessments included complication rates and rates of reoperation. Results at 3 years were reported at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration panel. Results indicate that the risk of any complication (including reoperation) at some point through 3 years after implant surgery is 36.6 percent for primary patients, 50.1 percent for revision-augmentation patients, 49.4 percent for primary reconstruction patients, and 47.5 percent for revision-reconstruction patients. Suspected rupture rates reported from the magnetic resonance imaging cohort were 0.5 percent for primary augmentation, 7.7 percent for revision-augmentation, 0.9 percent for primary reconstruction, and 0 percent for revision-reconstruction. Only two implants, in a single patient, were found surgically to be ruptured. There were 4.7 percent primary and 12.3 percent revision-augmentation patients who had their implants removed, with patient choice and severe capsular contracture being the most common reasons.

CONCLUSION

The data demonstrated safety and efficacy of the devices, but also indicate that a focus must be placed on better education and technique to improve clinical outcomes in the future.

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

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.

A long-term study of outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction with breast implants

BACKGROUND

Breast implants have been used worldwide for more than 40 years. Despite extensive clinical experience, there is continued concern about the safety of these devices. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy, complication rates, frequency of reoperation, and degree of patient satisfaction with different types of implants.

METHODS

This is a consecutive, population-based study consisting of all patients receiving implants at a multidisciplinary breast center between 1979 and 2004 (25 years). A prospective implant database was constructed and maintained in Excel, and statistical analysis was performed using SAS 8.2. Various outcomes, including infections, hematomas, undesirable waviness, capsular contracture, deflation, rupture, reoperation, and patient satisfaction, were monitored.

RESULTS

Data were collected on 3495 implants in 1529 women. The longer implants were in place, the greater the cumulative risk of developing contracture; hematoma significantly increased the risk of contracture; smooth and textured implants had similar contracture rates; polyurethane foam-covered implants had a reduced risk of contracture persisting for at least 10 years after implantation. There was a relatively high rate of reoperation and a relatively short interval between primary surgery and reoperation; the most common indication for reoperation was capsular contracture. Implant recipients expressed a high overall level of satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast implants are associated with a significant rate of local complications and reoperation. There are marked differences in outcomes as a function of implant surface type and surgical indication. Despite relatively frequent complications and reoperations, implant recipients are largely satisfied.

The Diagnosis of Silicone Breast-Implant Rupture

The objective was to evaluate the usefulness of clinical examination in the evaluation of breast-implant integrity, using the diagnosis at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the "gold standard." Fifty-five women with 109 implants underwent a breast examination either just before or shortly after an MRI examination. Twenty-four of 109 implants were clinically diagnosed with possible rupture or rupture. Eighteen of the 24 implants were ruptured according to the MRI examination (75%). Eighty-five implants were clinically classified as intact, and 43 of these were actually ruptured at MRI (51%). The sensitivity of the clinical examination for diagnosing rupture was thus 30% and the specificity 88%. The positive predictive value of a clinical diagnosis of rupture was 75%, and the negative predictive value was 49%. In this study, we found that when a clinical examination is used as the sole diagnostic tool to identify implant rupture, neither the sensitivity nor the specificity is acceptable.

Early experience with an anatomical soft cohesive silicone gel prosthesis in cosmetic and reconstructive breast implant surgery

Recently, an anatomic breast implant filled with soft cohesive silicone gel was introduced by Mentor Medical Systems onto the European market. This study reports the early experience of a single surgeon with this implant. All patients who received a Contour Profile Gel (CPG) implant from March 2001 to October 2002 were studied. Patient satisfaction with breast shape and consistency was assessed using linear analogue scales with a maximum score of 10. Thirty-five patients received CPG implants for cosmetic (10 patients, 20 breasts) and reconstructive (25 patients, 31 breasts) surgery purposes. Patients were satisfied with their breast shape (mean score: 8.3). Eighty-five percent of the breasts were rated as soft (score >/=6). No serious esthetic complications such as implant malposition or significant capsular contracture were observed. Anatomic soft cohesive gel implants provide excellent results in selected cases. They are well accepted by patients and not associated with an increased rate of complications.

Untreated Silicone Breast Implant Rupture

Implant rupture is a well-known complication of breast implant surgery that can pass unnoticed by both patient and physician. To date, no prospective study has addressed the possible health implications of silicone breast implant rupture. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether untreated ruptures are associated with changes over time in magnetic resonance imaging findings, serologic markers, or self-reported breast symptoms. A baseline magnetic resonance imaging examination was performed in 1999 on 271 women who were randomly chosen from a larger cohort of women having cosmetic breast implants for a median period of 12 years (range, 3 to 25 years). A follow-up magnetic resonance imaging examination was carried out in 2001, excluding women who underwent explantation in the period between the two magnetic resonance imaging examinations (n = 44). On the basis of these examinations, the authors identified 64 women who had at least one ruptured implant at the first magnetic resonance imaging examination and, for comparison, all women who had intact implants at both examinations (n = 98). Magnetic resonance images from the two examinations were compared and changes in rupture configuration were evaluated. Comparisons were also made for self-reported breast symptoms occurring during the study period and for changes in serum values of antinuclear antibodies, rheumatoid factor, and cardiolipin antibodies immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M. The majority of the women with implant rupture had no visible magnetic resonance imaging changes of their ruptured implants. For 11 implants (11 percent) in 10 women, the authors observed progression of silicone seepage, either as a conversion from intracapsular into extracapsular rupture (n = 7), as progression of extra-capsular silicone (n = 3), or as increasing herniation of the silicone within the fibrous capsule (n = 1); however, in most cases, these changes were minor. Some changes could be ascribed to trauma, but others seemed spontaneous. There was no increase in levels of autoantibodies during the study period in either study group. Women with untreated implant ruptures reported a significant increase in nonspecific breast changes (odds ratio, 2.1; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.2 to 3.8) compared with women without ruptures. On the basis of this first study of women with untreated silicone breast implant rupture, the authors conclude that implant rupture is a relatively harmless condition, which only rarely progresses and gives rise to notable symptoms. Even so, because of a small risk of silicone spread, the authors suggest that women with implant ruptures be followed clinically, if not operated on. Because implant ruptures often occur asymptomatically, any woman with silicone implants, regardless of rupture status, should be evaluated at regular intervals.

Mineralization followup with the use of NMR spectroscopy and others

High-resolution solid state NMR spectroscopy appears to be a powerful method for a better understanding of bone structures and bone substitutes and implants. It is particularly efficient to estimate osteoformation via bioceramic bone colonization. Pathological calcification occurring in bioprosthetic heart valves and breast prostheses can be characterized as a complement to X-ray spectrometry.

Self-reported diseases and symptoms by rupture status among unselected Danish women with cosmetic silicone breast implants

Epidemiologic evidence does not support an association between silicone breast implants and connective tissue or other rheumatic diseases. However, a recent study has suggested that women with ruptured implants may be at increased risk of developing fibromyalgia. An analysis of adverse health outcomes according to breast implant rupture status was conducted in 238 unselected Danish women with cosmetic silicone breast implants. Ninety-two of the women had definite implant rupture, and 146 had intact implants as determined by magnetic resonance imaging. Before undergoing imaging, the women provided blood samples and completed a self-administered questionnaire. Women with ruptured implants overall, and the subgroup with extracapsular ruptures (n = 23), were compared with women with intact implants regarding a number of self-reported diseases and symptoms and the presence of specific autoantibodies, such as antinuclear antibodies, rheumatoid factor, and cardiolipin immunoglobulin G and M antibodies. Overall, there were no differences in the occurrence of self-reported diseases or symptoms or in the presence of autoantibodies between women with intact implants and women with ruptured implants, including extracapsular rupture. The only exception was capsular contracture, which was reported six times more frequently by women with extracapsular ruptures than by women with intact implants (OR, 6.3; 95 percent CI, 1.7 to 23.5). In conclusion, this study of unselected women with silicone breast implants could establish no association between silicone implant rupture and specific diseases or symptoms related to connective tissue disease or other rheumatic conditions, except for an excess of capsular contracture among women with extracapsular rupture.

Survival properties of third-generation silicone gel breast implants

From 1992 through 2001, 100 third-generation silicone gel breast implants were removed from 50 women who had undergone cosmetic breast augmentation. The main reasons for explantation were: ptosis in 16 patients (32%); to further increase implant size in 15 patients (30%); suspected silicone-related health problems in 11 patients (22%); medical disease in five patients (10%); and breast firmness and pain in three patients (6%). Of the 100 third-generation gel implants, 42 were manufactured by McGhan Medical, 38 by Surgitek, 10 by Cox-Uphoff and 10 by Dow Corning. The 42 McGhan implants had been in place for two to 15 years (mean 8.8 years), the 10 Cox-Uphoff implants for seven to 14 years (mean 9.4 years), and the 10 Dow Corning implants for five to 12 years (mean 8.1 years). All the McGhan, Cox-Uphoff and Dow Corning implants were clinically intact at explantation. By contrast, of the 38 Surgitek third-generation implants, which had been in place for three to 13 years (mean 7.9 years), only 28 were intact. Ten (26%) had already disrupted. A comparison of Kaplan-Meier survival curves indicated that the 62 third-generation gel implants manufactured by McGhan, Cox-Uphoff and Dow Corning were much more durable than 271 previously explanted second-generation gel implants. By contrast, the 38 third-generation Surgitek gel implants were less durable than the 271 second-generation implants.

Epidemiological investigation of local complications after cosmetic breast implant surgery in Denmark

Concern has been raised recently regarding the absence of information on the occurrence and severity of local complications after cosmetic breast implantation. The authors evaluated the occurrence of local complications in a large epidemiological retrospective cohort study of women with cosmetic breast implants in Denmark. All women with breast implants were identified from the files of two private clinics of plastic surgery in Denmark. Information on implant characteristics, surgical procedure, as well as short- and long-term complications was obtained through medical record review. Patient characteristics were obtained through a self-administered questionnaire. A total of 754 women (1,572 implants) had at least one cosmetic implantation performed at the study clinics. Average age at implantation was 32 years. Implant types included silicone double lumen with textured surface, 31.2%; silicone single lumen with textured surface, 27.8%; silicone single lumen with smooth surface, 24.5%; silicone double lumen with smooth surface, 0.8%; and other or missing information, 15.7%. Average implant size was 247 ml (range, 110-630 ml). Placement was submuscular for 91.3% of implants, subglandular for 2.6%, and 6.1% had no available information. Overall, 77.8% of implantations were not followed by complications, 17.8% were followed by one complication, 3.6% were followed by two complications, and 0.8% were followed by three or more complications. In 94.6% of implantations, no additional hospitalizations were recorded as a result of complications. Forty-seven of 57 explantations/reimplantations were secondary to postoperative complications. General complications such as hematoma and infection were rare, occurring in 2.3% and 2.0% of implantations respectively. Capsular contracture remains the most common complication, occurring in 11.4% of implantations. In this investigation, among the first epidemiological studies of local complications, the authors found cosmetic breast implant surgery to be associated with a low frequency of normal surgical complications such as infection, hematoma, and wound dehiscence. Most complications were mild and did not lead to additional hospitalization. The complication that led most frequently to the need for additional surgery/hospitalization was capsular contracture. Kjøller K, Hölmich LR, Jacobsen PH, Friis S, Fryzek J, McLaughlin JK, Lipworth L, Henriksen TF, Jørgensen S, Bittmann S, Olsen JH. Epidemiological investigation of local complications after cosmetic breast implant surgery in Denmark.

Silicone gel breast implant rupture rates: research issues

Documenting the rate of rupture of silicone breast implants appears to be deceptively easy. Largely because of the phenomenon of "silent rupture," it isn't. The authors explore the various technical biases (selection, misclassification, and confounding) and methodological problems that have plagued much of the research conducted to date. By means of a series of illustrations, they argue that explantation has limited utility. Noninvasive techniques have to be used to gather the proper type of data on the timing and frequency of these events. Only with the proper incidence data will researchers be able to identify better the different mechanisms underlying implant rupture and the relative importance of each. The authors recommend that better and standardized definitions of implant rupture be developed, that greater recognition be given to the technical biases and a greater effort be made to eliminate them from investigations of implant rupture, and that more research be conducted by multidisciplinary teams. Because of the growing awareness of the complexity of this issue, the authors also recommend that properly constituted advisory teams be used to provide comprehensive oversight of future research projects from beginning to end.

Prevalence of silicone breast implant rupture among Danish women

The durability of silicone gel-filled breast implants is of concern, but there are few epidemiological studies on this issue. To date, most of the relevant findings are derived from studies of explantation, which suffer from bias by including women with symptoms or concerns about their implants. As part of a long-term magnetic resonance imaging study of the incidence of rupture, this study involved 271 women with 533 cosmetic breast implants who were randomly selected from among women who underwent cosmetic breast implantation from 1973 through 1997 at one public and three private plastic-surgery clinics in Denmark. The prevalence of rupture was determined from the first magnetic resonance screening. The images were evaluated by four independent readers, using a standardized, validated form. The outcomes under study were rupture, possible rupture, and intact implant. Ruptures were categorized as intracapsular or extracapsular. Overall, 26 percent of implants in 36 percent of the women examined were found to be ruptured, and an additional 6 percent were possibly ruptured. Of the ruptured implants, 22 percent were extracapsular. In multiple regression analyses, age of implant was significantly associated with rupture among second- and third-generation implants, with a 12-fold increased prevalence odds ratio for rupture of implants that were between 16 and 20 years of age, compared with implants between 3 and 5 years of age. Surgitek implants (Medical Engineering Corporation, Racine, Wis.) had a significantly increased prevalence odds ratio of 2.6 for rupture, compared with the reference implants. No significant association was found with the position (subglandular or submuscular) or the type of implant (single- or double-lumen). Extracapsular ruptures were significantly associated with a history of closed capsulotomy (p = 0.001). In the future, the authors plan to examine the women in their cohort with a second magnetic resonance imaging scan to establish the incidence of rupture, a parameter unknown to date in the literature, and to further characterize those factors associated with the actual risk of rupture.