Learning objectives
To review the evolution of breast silicone implants and the changes in rupture imaging patterns that came with their new characteristics of shape, shell and filler.
To unite specific ultrasonographic, mammography and magnetic resonance imaging features in order to guide the diagnosis of rupture.
Background
Reports of breast augmentation started in 1895 when a lipoma was successfully transplanted from a patient’s back to a mastectomized patient. Since then, different implant materials have been developed and in 1962 the silicone gel prosthesis was introduced, becoming the most common type in the world and being extensively modified until today, especially the thickness of the shell and the cohesiveness of the gel in an attempt to reduce complications and produce more natural results.
Silicone implants can be categorized in five generations, reflecting the...
Findings and procedure details
Several illustrative cases from our breast imaging group database will be used to demonstrate the main signs of rupture in different imaging techniques, comparing the traditional and the new generations of implants.
The ultrasonography exam shows the implants surface as a trilaminar line formed by an hyperechogenic line corresponding to the outer face of the fibrous capsule, an intermediate line representing the interface between fibrous capsule and elastomer, and a deep line representing the inner face of the elastomer shell. The identification of a regular...
Conclusion
The aim of the study is to outline a practical approach of semisolid implant ruptures findings, once the main signs of failure are different from those observed in the regular implants due to the more cohesive filler gel. Therefore it is important to recognize the differences between them in order to guide the diagnosis and avoid pitfalls.
Personal information and conflict of interest
N. R. L. Mágero; São Paulo/BR - nothing to disclose E. E. Françolin; São Paulo/BR - nothing to disclose R. L. M. Ribeiro; São Paulo/BR - nothing to disclose V. C. Zanetta; São Paulo/BR - nothing to disclose B. M. Takaki Tachibana; São Paulo/BR - nothing to disclose Í. Cordeiro de Macedo Pontes; São Paulo/BR - nothing to disclose A. I. Gomes; São Paulo/BR - nothing to disclose G. C. D. Guerra; São Paulo/BR - nothing to disclose F. A. Sulla Lupinacci; São Paulo/BR -...
References
Seiler SJ, Sharma PB, Hayes JC, Ganti R, Mootz AR, Eads ED, Teotia SS, Evans P. Multimodality Imaging-based Evaluation of Single-Lumen Silicone Breast Implants for Rupture. RadioGraphics 2017; 37:366–382.
Coombs DM, Grover R, Prassinos A, Gurunluoglu R. Breast augmentation surgery: Clinical considerations. Cleveland Clinic Journal Of Medicine. February 2019 Vol. 86 nº2.
Juanpere S, Perez E, Huc O, Motos N, Pont J, Pedraza S. Imaging of breast implants—a pictorial review. Insights Imaging (2011) 2:653–670.
Schmitt W, Coelho JM, Lopes J, Marques JC. The Role of...
