Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings

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.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Scaranelo,Anabel Medeiros, Marques,Américo Ferreira, Smialowski,Elizabeth Brenda, Lederman,Henriquel Manoel
Format: Digital revista
Language:English
Published: Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM 2004
Online Access:http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802004000200002
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:scielo:S1516-31802004000200002
record_format ojs
spelling oai:scielo:S1516-318020040002000022004-07-05Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findingsScaranelo,Anabel MedeirosMarques,Américo FerreiraSmialowski,Elizabeth BrendaLederman,Henriquel Manoel Silicone Breast implants Rupture Mammography Ultrasonography Magnetic resonance imaging 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.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAssociação Paulista de Medicina - APMSao Paulo Medical Journal v.122 n.2 20042004-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802004000200002en10.1590/S1516-31802004000200002
institution SCIELO
collection OJS
country Brasil
countrycode BR
component Revista
access En linea
databasecode rev-scielo-br
tag revista
region America del Sur
libraryname SciELO
language English
format Digital
author Scaranelo,Anabel Medeiros
Marques,Américo Ferreira
Smialowski,Elizabeth Brenda
Lederman,Henriquel Manoel
spellingShingle Scaranelo,Anabel Medeiros
Marques,Américo Ferreira
Smialowski,Elizabeth Brenda
Lederman,Henriquel Manoel
Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings
author_facet Scaranelo,Anabel Medeiros
Marques,Américo Ferreira
Smialowski,Elizabeth Brenda
Lederman,Henriquel Manoel
author_sort Scaranelo,Anabel Medeiros
title Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings
title_short Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings
title_full Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings
title_fullStr Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings
title_sort evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings
description 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.
publisher Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM
publishDate 2004
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802004000200002
work_keys_str_mv AT scaraneloanabelmedeiros evaluationoftheruptureofsiliconebreastimplantsbymammographyultrasonographyandmagneticresonanceimaginginasymptomaticpatientscorrelationwithsurgicalfindings
AT marquesamericoferreira evaluationoftheruptureofsiliconebreastimplantsbymammographyultrasonographyandmagneticresonanceimaginginasymptomaticpatientscorrelationwithsurgicalfindings
AT smialowskielizabethbrenda evaluationoftheruptureofsiliconebreastimplantsbymammographyultrasonographyandmagneticresonanceimaginginasymptomaticpatientscorrelationwithsurgicalfindings
AT ledermanhenriquelmanoel evaluationoftheruptureofsiliconebreastimplantsbymammographyultrasonographyandmagneticresonanceimaginginasymptomaticpatientscorrelationwithsurgicalfindings
_version_ 1756421479906410496