The diagnosis of silicone breast-implant rupture: clinical findings compared with findings at magnetic resonance imaging

Lisbet Rosenkrantz Hölmich, Jon P Fryzek, Kim Kjøller, Vibeke Bro Breiting, Anna Jørgensen, Christen Krag, Joseph K McLaughlin

98 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.
Original languageEnglish
JournalAnnals of Plastic Surgery
Volume54
Issue number6
Pages (from-to)583-9
Number of pages7
ISSN0148-7043
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2005

Keywords

  • Adult
  • Biocompatible Materials
  • Breast Implantation
  • Breast Implants
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging
  • Middle Aged
  • Physical Examination
  • Postoperative Complications
  • Prosthesis Failure
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Silicone Gels
  • Single-Blind Method

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The diagnosis of silicone breast-implant rupture: clinical findings compared with findings at magnetic resonance imaging'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this