1
|
Marques-Piubelli ML, Lyapichev KA, Fnu A, Adrada B, Stewart J, Hunt KK, Clemens MW, Iyer S, Wu Y, El Hussein S, Xu J, Ok CY, Li S, Pierson DM, Ferrufino-Schmidt MC, Nahmod KA, Yoga A, Hunsicker L, Evans MG, Resetkova E, Qiu L, Khanlari M, Garces SA, Bueso-Ramos CE, Medeiros LJ, Miranda RN. The Spectrum of Non-neoplastic Changes Associated With Breast Implants: Histopathology, Imaging, and Clinical Significance. Am J Surg Pathol 2024; 48:e43-e64. [PMID: 38451836 DOI: 10.1097/pas.0000000000002198] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/09/2024]
Abstract
Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma has been recognized as a distinct entity in the World Health Organization classification of hematolymphoid neoplasms. These neoplasms are causally related to textured implants that were used worldwide until recently. Consequently, there is an increased demand for processing periprosthetic capsules, adding new challenges for surgeons, clinicians, and pathologists. In the literature, the focus has been on breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma; however, benign complications related to the placement of breast implants occur in up to 20% to 30% of patients. Imaging studies are helpful in assessing patients with breast implants for evidence of implant rupture, changes in tissues surrounding the implants, or regional lymphadenopathy related to breast implants, but pathologic examination is often required. In this review, we couple our experience with a review of the literature to describe a range of benign lesions associated with breast implants that can be associated with different clinical presentations or pathogenesis and that may require different diagnostic approaches. We illustrate the spectrum of the most common of these benign disorders, highlighting their clinical, imaging, gross, and microscopic features. Finally, we propose a systematic approach for the diagnosis and handling of breast implant specimens in general.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kirill A Lyapichev
- Department of Pathology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Swaminathan Iyer
- Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | | | - Siba El Hussein
- Department of Pathology, The University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, VT
| | - Jie Xu
- Department of Hematopathology
| | | | | | - Diane M Pierson
- Department of Pathology, Kings Daughters Medical Center, Ashland, KY
| | | | | | - Arthy Yoga
- Houston Methodist, Breast Surgical Oncology, Houston, TX
| | - Lisa Hunsicker
- Revalla Plastic Surgery and Medical Esthetics, Denver, CO
| | | | | | - Lianqun Qiu
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Mahsa Khanlari
- Department of Pathology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Thai JN, Sodagari F, Colwell AS, Winograd JM, Revzin MV, Mahmoud H, Mozayan S, Chou SHS, Destounis SV, Butler RS. Multimodality Imaging of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction Techniques, Complications, and Tumor Recurrence. Radiographics 2024; 44:e230070. [PMID: 38573814 DOI: 10.1148/rg.230070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/06/2024]
Abstract
For women undergoing mastectomy, breast reconstruction can be performed by using implants or autologous tissue flaps. Mastectomy options include skin- and nipple-sparing techniques. Implant-based reconstruction can be performed with saline or silicone implants. Various autologous pedicled or free tissue flap reconstruction methods based on different tissue donor sites are available. The aesthetic outcomes of implant- and flap-based reconstructions can be improved with oncoplastic surgery, including autologous fat graft placement and nipple-areolar complex reconstruction. The authors provide an update on recent advances in implant reconstruction techniques and contemporary expanded options for autologous tissue flap reconstruction as it relates to imaging modalities. As breast cancer screening is not routinely performed in this clinical setting, tumor recurrence after mastectomy and reconstruction is often detected by palpation at physical examination. Most local recurrences occur within the skin and subcutaneous tissue. Diagnostic breast imaging continues to have a critical role in confirmation of disease recurrence. Knowledge of the spectrum of benign and abnormal imaging appearances in the reconstructed breast is important for postoperative evaluation of patients, including recognition of early and late postsurgical complications and breast cancer recurrence. The authors provide an overview of multimodality imaging of the postmastectomy reconstructed breast, as well as an update on screening guidelines and recommendations for this unique patient population. ©RSNA, 2024 Test Your Knowledge questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janice N Thai
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Faezeh Sodagari
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Amy S Colwell
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Jonathan M Winograd
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Margarita V Revzin
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Hagar Mahmoud
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Sara Mozayan
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Shinn-Huey S Chou
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Stamatia V Destounis
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| | - Reni S Butler
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging (J.N.T., F.S., S.H.S.C.); and Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (A.S.C., J.M.W.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (M.V.R., R.S.B.); Yale New Haven Health, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT (H.M., S.M.); and Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY (S.V.D.)
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Jayasinghe RT, Ruseckaite R, Gartoulla P, Elder E, Hopper I. Patient Reported Outcome Measures After Breast Augmentation - Using the BREAST-Q IS. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 2022; 13:1-8. [PMID: 35046741 PMCID: PMC8761034 DOI: 10.2147/prom.s330163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2021] [Accepted: 11/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Cosmetic breast augmentation procedures are commonly performed breast device surgeries. The Australian Breast Device Registry (ABDR) administers a five-question patient reported outcome measure (PROM), the BREAST-Q Implant Surveillance module (BREAST-Q IS), to patients 1, 2 and 5 years after breast device surgery. The measure includes an open-ended question to add any comments. This study aimed to use the responses to this open-ended question to assess participants' experiences of breast devices 1 and 2 years after breast augmentation. The secondary objective was to identify emerging and important issues relating to breast augmentation and devices. PATIENTS AND METHODS This qualitative descriptive study was conducted using a randomly selected sample of 268 responses to the open-ended question in the BREAST-Q IS, from the ABDR database. These responses were from patients who underwent breast augmentation between 2015 and 2018. Comments were analyzed using conventional content analysis in NVivo 12. RESULTS Four major themes were identified: satisfaction following breast augmentation, dissatisfaction following breast augmentation, complications and breast symptoms following breast augmentation and other comments. Two dominant themes were regarding satisfaction (n = 112) with overall surgical outcome, medical team, and post-operative appearance and complications and breast symptoms (n = 177) following breast augmentation. Emerging issues identified were rippling of breast implants and breast implant illness (BII). CONCLUSION PROMs can be used to understand patients' perspectives on various aspects of their own surgical experiences. Participants provided responses regarding complications and breast symptoms experienced, and rippling of the breast implants and BII are emerging issues after breast augmentation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Randi T Jayasinghe
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rasa Ruseckaite
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Pragya Gartoulla
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Elisabeth Elder
- Westmead Breast Cancer Institute and Breast Surgeons of Australia and New Zealand, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Ingrid Hopper
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Johnson L, Lowry K, Scheel J, Mau B, Rockoff SJ. Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma with contralateral invasive lobular carcinoma. Radiol Case Rep 2020; 15:2572-2576. [PMID: 33082901 PMCID: PMC7552810 DOI: 10.1016/j.radcr.2020.09.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2020] [Revised: 09/08/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a rare type of T-cell lymphoma that arises in the setting of textured breast implants. In this case report, a 69-year-old woman with a remote history of right-sided invasive lobular carcinoma status post right mastectomy and bilateral breast reconstruction presents with spontaneous right breast swelling and pain, suspicious for implant rupture. Diagnostic MRI revealed a peri-implant fluid collection in the right breast and focal nonmass enhancement in the left breast. The patient was ultimately diagnosed with right-sided BIA-ALCL and left-sided invasive lobular carcinoma. Although intravenous gadolinium contrast is not needed to assess implant integrity, it can be used to evaluate for malignancy when the patient is at an increased risk for developing breast cancer. In this case, the use of contrast revealed the rare instance of a synchronous contralateral invasive lobular carcinoma. Despite the rarity of BIA-ALCL with an estimated incidence of 1:30,000 in women with textured implants, it is essential that radiologists include this entity in the differential in the appropriate clinical setting as surgical resection is curative if performed before the disease has spread.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Johnson
- University of Washington, Department of Radiology, 1959 N.E. Pacific St., Box 357115, Seattle, WA 98195-7115
- Corresponding author.
| | - Kathryn Lowry
- Breast Imaging Section, Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - John Scheel
- Breast Imaging Section, Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - Brian Mau
- University of Washington, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, 1959 Seattle, WA
| | | |
Collapse
|