Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients
correlation with surgical findings
Keywords:
Silicone, Breast implants, Rupture, Mammography, Ultrasonography, Magnetic resonance imagingAbstract
CONTEXT: Different imaging methods can identify the integrity of breast implants and also the extent of possible silicone leakage. Mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging are often used to evaluate the integrity of breast implants, usually in patients that are symptomatic for rupture. A group of clinically asymptomatic patients was taken as a sample. These patients wanted to remove or change their breast implants for psychological or cosmetic reasons. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of breast implant rupture in an asymptomatic population. TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective study. SETTING: Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. METHODS: The participants were 44 asymptomatic patients who subsequently had implants surgically removed. Eighty-three implants were evaluated by both film-screen mammography and high-resolution sonography and 77 implants were evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging. The sensitivity and specificity of mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging were assessed using predetermined diagnostic criteria for implant rupture. All radiological signs were discussed and false positives and false negatives were retrospectively evaluated to identify the pitfalls in the investigations. RESULTS: The respective sensitivity and specificity of mammography were 20% and 89%; sonography, 30% and 81%; and magnetic resonance imaging, 64% and 77%. The differences between patients with breast implants for cosmetic and oncological reasons were discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience suggests that magnetic resonance imaging seems to be the best imaging method on its own for the evaluation of rupturing among asymptomatic patients.
Downloads
References
Silverman BG, Brown SL, Bright RA, Kaczmarek RG, Arrowsmith-Lowe JB, Kessler DA. Reported complications of silicone gel breast implants: an epidemiologic review. Ann In- tern Med. 1996;124(8):744-56.
Theophelis LG, Stevenson TR. Radiographic evidence of breast implant rupture. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1986;78(5):673-5.
Weizer G, Malone RS, Netscher DT, Walker LE, Thornby J. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography in diagnosing breast implant rupture. Ann Plast Surg. 1995;34(4):352-61.
Everson LI, Parantainen H, Detlie T, et al. Diagnosis of breast implant rupture: imaging findings and relative efficacies of imaging techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;163(1):57-60.
Gorczyca DP, DeBruhl ND, Ahn CY, et al. Silicone breast im- plant ruptures in an animal model: comparison of mammography, MR imaging, US, and CT. Radiology. 1994;190(1):227-32.
Reynolds HE, Buckwalter KA, Jackson VP, Siwy BK, Alexan- der SG. Comparison of mammography, sonography, and mag- netic resonance imaging in the detection of silicone-gel breast implant rupture. Ann Plast Surg. 1994;33(3):247-55; discus- sion 256-7.
Leibman AJ. Imaging of complications of augmentation mam- maplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1994;93(6):1134-40.
Baker JL, Bartels RJ, Douglas WM. Closed compression tech- nique for rupturing a contracted capsule around a breast im- plant. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1976;58(2):137-41.
Feliberti MC, Arrillaga A, Colon GA. Rupture of inflated breast implants in closed compression capsulotomy: case report. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1977;59(6):848.
Andersen B, Hawtof D, Alani H, Kapetansky D. The diagnosis of ruptured breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989; 84(6):903-7.
Robinson OG, Bradley EL, Wilson DS. Analysis of explanted silicone implants: a report of 300 patients. Ann Plast Surg. 1995;34(1):1-6; discussion 6-7.
Levine RA, Collins TL. Definitive diagnosis of breast implant rupture by ultrasonography. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991; 87(6):1126-8.
van Wingerden JJ, van Staden MM. Ultrasound mammogra- phy in prosthesis-related breast augmentation complications. Ann Plast Surg. 1989;22(1):32-5.
Rosculet KA, Ikeda DM, Forrest ME, et al. Ruptured gel-filled silicone breast implants: sonographic findings in 19 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992;159(4):711-6.
DeBruhl ND, Gorczyca DP, Ahn CY, Shaw WW, Bassett LW. Silicone breast implants: US evaluation. Radiology. 1993; 189(1):95-8.
Harris KM, Ganott MA, Shestak KC, Losken HW, Tobon H. Silicone implant rupture: detection with US. Radiology. 1993;187(3):761-8.
Peters W, Pugash R. Ultrasound analysis of 150 patients with silicone gel breast implants. Ann Plast Surg. 1993;31(1):7-9.
Petro JA, Klein SA, Niazi Z, Salzberg CA, Byrne D. Evaluation of ultrasound as a tool in the follow-up of patients with breast implants: a preliminary, prospective study. Ann Plast Surg. 1994;32(6):580-7.
Bauab SP. Aspectos radiológicos e ecográficos das mamas com próteses de silicone. Radiol Bras. 1994;27:225-33.
Caskey CI, Berg WA, Anderson ND, Sheth S, Chang BW, Ham- per UM. Breast implant rupture: diagnosis with US. Radiol- ogy. 1994;190(3):819-23.
Liston JC, Malata CM, Varma S, Scott M, Sharpe DT. The role of ultrasound imaging in the diagnosis of breast implant rup- ture: a prospective study. Br J Plast Surg. 1994;47(7):477-82.
Chung KC, Wilkins EG, Beil RJ, et al. Diagnosis of silicone gel breast implant rupture by ultrasonography. Plast Reconstr Surg.1996;97(1):104-9.
Venta LA, Salomon CG, Flisak ME, Venta ER, Izquierdo R, Angelats J. Sonographic signs of breast implant rupture. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;166(6):1413-9.
Park AJ, Walsh J, Reddy PS, Chetty U, Watson AC. The detec- tion of breast implant rupture using ultrasound. Br J Plast Surg. 1996;49(5):299-301.
Harris KM. Ultrasonographic evaluation of the failing implant. In: Gorczyca DP, Brenner RJ, editors. The augmented breast: radiologic and clinical perspectives. New York: Thieme Medi- cal Publishers; 1997. p.74-110.
Berg WA, Caskey CI, Hamper UM, et al. Single- and double- lumen silicone breast implant integrity: prospective evaluation of MR and US criteria. Radiology. 1995;197(1):45-52.
Gorczyca DP, Schneider E, DeBruhl ND, et al. Silicone breast implant rupture: comparison between three-point Dixon and fast spin-echo MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;162(2):305-10.
Ahn CY, Shaw WW, Narayanan K, et al. Definitive diagnosis of breast implant rupture using magnetic resonance imaging. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993;92(4):681-91.
Gorczyca DP, Sinha S, Ahn CY, et al. Silicone breast implants in vivo: MR imaging. Radiology. 1992;185(2):407-10.
Soo MS, Kornguth PJ, Walsh R, Elenberger CD, Georgiade GS. Complex radial folds versus subtle signs of intracapsular rupture of breast implants: MR findings with surgical correla- tion. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;166(6):1421-7.
Scaranelo AM. Estudo comparativo entre bobinas de corpo e superfície na mamografia por ressonância magnética de próteses de silicone. [Comparative study between body and surface coils in magnetic resonance mammography of silicone prothesis]. Radiol Bras. 2001;34(2):71-7.
Frankel S, Occhipinti K, Kaufman L, et al. MRI findings in subjects with breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995; 96(4):852-9.
Gorczyca DP. Magnetic resonance imaging of the failing im- plant. In: Gorczyca DP, Brenner RJ, editors. The augmented breast: radiologic and clinical perspectives. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers; 1997. p.121-43.
Piccoli CW, Greer JG, Mitchell DG. Breast MR imaging for cancer detection and implant evaluation: potential pitfalls. Radiographics. 1996;16(1):63-75.
