Surgical Treatment of Facial Siliconoma Involving the Temporal Area

Cutaneous complications associated with breast augmentation: A review

Breast augmentation is one of the most popular and safe cosmetic procedures performed by plastic surgeons worldwide. Although breast implants are available in a number of different materials, silicone-filled implants remain the most common type. However, prior to the development of breast implants, various materials were injected into the soft tissues of the breasts to increase breast volume, which caused cutaneous complications and disfigurement. This review details the history of breast augmentation, the current methods used in augmentation surgery, and associated cutaneous complications.

A case series and a review of the literature on foreign modelling agent reaction: an emerging problem

Foreign modelling agent reactions (FMAR) are the result of the injection of unapproved high-viscosity fluids with the purpose of cosmetic body modelling. Its consequences lead to ulceration, disfigurement and even death, and it has reached epidemic proportions in several regions of the world. We describe a series of patients treated for FMARs in a specialised wound care centre and a thorough review of the literature. A retrospective chart review was performed from January 1999 to September 2015 of patients who had been injected with non-medical foreign agents and who developed cutaneous ulceration needing treatment at the dermatology wound care centre. This study involved 23 patients whose ages ranged from 22 to 67 years with higher proportion of women and homosexual men. The most commonly injected sites were the buttocks (38·5%), legs (18%), thighs (15·4%) and breasts (11·8%). Mineral oil (39%) and other unknown substances (30·4%) were the most commonly injected. The latency period ranged from 1 week to 17 years. Complications included several skin changes such as sclerosis and ulceration as well as systemic complications. FMAR is a severe syndrome that may lead to deadly complications, and is still very common in Latin America.

Gluteal Augmentation With Liquid Silicone of Unknown Purity Causes Granulomas in an Adult Female

Background:

A 39-year-old woman presented with a history of relapsing painful erythema and progressive fibrosis of the lower back. Upon questioning, the patient admitted to receiving liquid silicone (LS) injections for gluteal augmentation abroad and was diagnosed with silicone migration, granulomatous reaction, and fibrosis of the lower back.

Objective:

To review the history of LS injections for cosmetic soft tissue augmentation (STA) as well as its complications and potential treatments.

Methods:

The author reviewed articles that involved the use of LS for STA and summarized their findings.

Results:

The author summarizes the various treatments that have been described for inflammatory reactions following LS injection.

Conclusion:

The growth of cosmetic medical tourism and its inherent lack of after-care as well as patients’ ability to obtain restricted products at home raise the likelihood of encountering granulomatous or fibrotic reactions to fillers during consultations. Physicians should have a structured approach to these patients.

Liposuction and lipofilling for treatment of symptomatic silicone toxicosis of the gluteal region

BACKGROUND

Silicone injection can cause numerous posttreatment complications-including debilitating pain, cellulitis, abscesses, overlying skin compromise, and siliconomas distorting overlying tissues-that can be difficult to manage.

OBJECTIVES

The authors evaluate liposuction as a treatment for patients experiencing complications from silicone injections to the gluteal region, to both preserve aesthetic appearance and minimize further risk of complication from these procedures.

METHODS

Eight patients (7 women and 1 man) who presented consecutively to us between 2010 and 2013 with complications from silicone injections to their gluteal region were enrolled in this study. Each patient was evaluated by computed tomography scan and a 0 to 6 visual analog scale for pain. Emergency room (ER) visits, previous hospital admissions, and cellulitis requiring antibiotics in the 12 months prior to treatment were recorded. Patients were treated with ultrasonic and standard liposuction followed by lipotransfer into the gluteal musculature. A Student t test was used for statistical comparison of pre- and postoperative values.

RESULTS

Average patient age was 36 years (range, 25-43 years). All patients initially presented with intense pain as assessed by a visual analog scale; by the 12th week postoperatively, the entire cohort experienced remission in pain. At 1 year postoperatively, no patients had infections (vs 75% preoperatively; P = .028), visited the ER (vs 50% preoperatively; P = .058), or were hospitalized (vs an average of 1.5 hospitalizations per patient preoperatively; P = .066).

CONCLUSIONS

Liposuction with immediate intramuscular fat transfer for buttock augmentation appears to be a safe surgical option that preserves aesthetic appearance for patients with gluteal silicone toxicosis.

Neck lymphadenitis due to silicone granuloma after mammary implants

INTRODUCTION

A foreign body reaction due to silicone where it is infiltrated or at the places to which it can migrate is known as siliconoma. The use of silicone in breast augmentation procedures can provoke this reaction at the neck level in cases of leakage from mammary implants.

METHODS

We reviewed the cases of patients with increased size neck lymph nodes who had previously undergone plastic surgery of the breast with highly cohesive silicone gel implants.

RESULTS

In a 10-year period, we identified 12 cases with silicone-infiltrated neck lymphadenopathies, histologically confirmed by fine needle aspiration. They represented 3.5% of patients attended for neck lymph node study. We removed those detected by physical examination and CT in 5 cases, due to pathological characteristics of the node or a previous malignant history. In 2 of these nodes recurred, and node size also increased in 2 of the other 7 non-operated cases. After implant removal, silicone leakage was observed in only 7 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Cohesive gel silicone used for mammary implants can generate increased neck lymphadenopathies as a secondary effect due to systemic reactions against the silicone when it migrates in cases of implant failure. Surgical options for involved nodes usually do not offer good long-term results.

Complications from injectable materials used for breast augmentation

Fewer surgical procedures have a history as fascinating and as terrifying as breast augmentation. Initial efforts at augmentation involved injection of substances such as paraffin or oil into the breast tissue, or the implantation of substances including ivory or glass balls, or rubber. More recent efforts have included the injection of liquid silicone or polyacrylamide hydrogel. The current paper reviews four distinct eras of breast augmentation, and provides the current status of these injection materials. A case report is presented on a woman whose breasts were injected with polyacrylamide hydrogel in Iran. The current status of this group of materials is also presented. During the past 110 years, history has repeated itself during each of the four eras of injection.