Axillary silicone lymphadenopathy secondary to augmentation mammaplasty

Gram-Positive Bacteria Increase Breast Implant-Related Complications: Prospective Analysis of 100 Revised Implants

BACKGROUND

Breast implant-related complications can be reduced by strict antiseptic precautions during insertion, but bacteria can often be found on implant surfaces on the occasion of revision surgery. The authors prospectively analyzed the association of bacteria found on breast implant surfaces with implant-related complications in breast implant revision cases.

METHODS

The authors analyzed a total of 100 breast implant revisions in 66 patients between August of 2018 and January of 2021. Capsular swabs and capsular samples were taken intraoperatively. Analyses on the occurrence of bacteria and the occurrence of implant-related complications were performed. In addition, correlations between bacteria-contaminated breast implant surfaces and implant-related complications were performed.

RESULTS

Implant-related complications (perforation, rupture, capsular contraction) were observed in 42 implant sites: eight unilateral and 34 bilateral cases. In total, 16 swabs showed positive bacterial growth, 10 of which were associated with a breast implant-related complication (χ 2 = x, y, and z; P = 0.006). The most common implant-based complication at contaminated prosthetics was implant rupture. The association of contaminated breast implants and implant rupture was statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors identified a correlation between implant complications and Gram-positive bacteria found on breast implant surfaces. The most common implant-based complication seen at simultaneously positive samples was implant rupture in 50% of the authors' cases. No capsular contraction or other complications were seen.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

A Surgeon's Empirical Perspectives on Use of High-resolution Ultrasound in Preoperatively Detecting a Rupture in the Context of Breast Implant Crisis in Korea

BACKGROUND

We previously proposed a novel method for detecting a rupture of a breast implant using high-resolution ultrasound (HRUS). We therefore conducted this retrospective, observational study to describe its feasibility in making a preoperative diagnosis of rupture of the device in patients receiving an implant-based augmentation mammaplasty.

METHODS

We initially evaluated the medical records of the patients who had received primary or secondary augmentation mammaplasty using a breast implant at other hospitals for aesthetic or reconstructive purposes between August 31, 2017, and August 31, 2020. The patients underwent breast US using the Aplio i600 (Canon Medical System, Otawara, Tochigi, Japan) system with a 7-18 MHz linear transducer. Through a retrospective review of the patients' medical records, we analyzed their baseline and clinical characteristics. Then, we compared an agreement between preoperative diagnosis of rupture on HRUS and findings at reoperation.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients with rupture (55 breasts) were evaluated for the performance of ultrasound in making a diagnosis of rupture. This showed that they were unaware of rupture but they were diagnosed with it on ultrasound. Preoperatively, there were no cases of rupture in 110 left breasts (80.9%) and 107 right breasts (78.7%), which exactly matched to the number of breasts without rupture on HRUS. Moreover, preoperatively, there were 26 (19.1%) and 29 cases (21.3%) of rupture in the left and right breast, respectively, which exactly matched to the number of breasts with rupture on HRUS.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, patients who are suspected of having rupture of a breast implant should be stringently evaluated for presence of rupture and, if any, its scope using HRUS. Moreover, we propose that surgeons consider using HRUS in making a preoperative diagnosis of rupture of a breast implant.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Intramammary melanoma micrometastasis within a silicone-implanted breast

We present the case of a 53-year-old woman with silicone breast implants who underwent excision of an abdominal melanoma and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Two lymph nodes were excised; both lying in the breast parenchyma adjacent to the intact right breast capsule. The lymph node histology revealed a subcapsular melanoma deposit along with silicone lymphadenopathy in the sentinel node. This case highlights that sentinel lymph nodes can be located in alternative locations to the common lymphatic basins and, therefore, the importance of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy. We also discuss subclinical breast implant rupture as a causative factor for silicone lymphadenopathy.

Progressive silicone lymphadenopathy post mastectomy and implant reconstruction for breast cancer

A 56-year-old woman with a 12-year history of recurrent triple-negative invasive carcinoma of the breast presented with progressive enlargement of lymph nodes in the setting of established rupture of the ipsilateral silicone breast implant. Although this was proven to be benign on cytology, its progressive nature led to repeated core biopsies for histology, which were necessary given the high-risk nature of triple-negative breast cancer and the multiple proven previous recurrences. The histology demonstrated features of silicone deposits without evidence of malignancy. This case demonstrates the dilemma in surveillance of high-risk patients with breast cancer who have had previous silicone lymphadenopathy.

Biological Morphogenetic Surgery: A Minimally Invasive Procedure to Address Different Biological Mechanisms

We present a methodology called biological morphogenetic surgery (BMS) that can recover (enlarge or reduce) the shape/volume of anatomic structures/tissues affected by congenital or acquired malformations based on a minimally invasive procedure. This emerges as a new concept in which the main task of surgery is the biological modulation of different remodeling and repair mechanisms. When applied, for example, to a tuberous breast deformity, the "enlarging BMS" expands the retracted tissue surrounding the gland through a cutting tip of a needle being inserted through small incisions percutaneously, accounting for the biological activity of the grafted fat. The obtained spaces might be spontaneously occupied and later filled with autologous grafted fat, which promotes tissue expansion by eliciting adipogenesis and preventing fibrosis. The "reducing BMS" creates an interruption of the contact between the derma and the hypoderma of the abnormally large areola and then promotes adipocytes to induce a fibrotic reaction, leading to areola reduction. Current evidence suggests that BMS might induce a bivalent mesenchymalization of the adipocyte, which promotes either new adipogenesis and angiogenesis of local fat (expanding BMS) or the granulation tissue/fibrotic response (reducing BMS), thus leading to the physiological recovery of the affected structures/tissues to normality. Level of Evidence: 4.

Granuloma formation secondary to silicone injection for soft-tissue augmentation in facial cosmetics: Mechanisms and literature review

The use of injectable fillers is increasingly popular as an alternative to surgery for facial cosmetic applications. In this regard, silicone is a versatile biomaterial filler that has been used for these purposes, but its use warrants further investigation, especially since it is not clinically approved for such uses. We describe the use of silicone as a facial injectable filler through a scholarly review of the literature for cases of silicone granuloma formation published from September 2007 through September 2017, and we present various contexts in which this complication has been observed. We further review the immunologic etiology of granuloma formation and other complications of silicone injections. We write this report to caution physicians on the use of silicone fillers which, for all their advantages, are associated with significant long-term risks that are frequently overlooked.

Detection of Pathologically Proven Silicone Lymphadenopathy: Ultrasonography Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging

OBJECTIVES

To compare the abilities of ultrasonography (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing silicone lymphadenopathy.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with silicone breast implants who underwent axillary and intramammary lymph node core needle biopsies were retrospectively collected (December 2011-May 2017). Ultrasonographic examinations were analyzed for the presence of the US snowstorm sign, and MRI examinations were evaluated for the presence of the silicone signal. A pathologist reviewed all biopsied specimens. Ultrasonographic and MRI evaluations were compared to pathologic results. The sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing silicone lymphadenopathy were calculated for the snowstorm sign on US and the MRI silicone signal.

RESULTS

Forty-one lymph node biopsies were included: 8 (19.5%) silicone-containing lymph nodes, 29 (70.7%) reactive nodes, and 4 (9.8%) malignant nodes. All nodes were evaluated by US, and 18 of 41 (43.9%) were evaluated by MRI. Seven of 8 (87.5%) silicone-containing nodes showed the snowstorm sign compared to none (0.0%) of the reactive or malignant nodes (P = .0001). One of 5 (20.0%) silicone-containing nodes evaluated by MRI showed the silicone signal compared to none (0.0%) of the reactive or malignant nodes (P = .278). The sensitivity and specificity of the snowstorm sign for diagnosing silicone lymphadenopathy were 87.5% and 100%, respectively, whereas those of the MRI silicone signal were 20.0% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The US snowstorm sign is much more sensitive for silicone lymphadenopathy than the MRI silicone signal. In cases of suspected silicone lymphadenopathy, the use of US in addition to MRI should be contemplated.

Silicone lymphadenopathy: presentation of a further case containing asteroid bodies on fine-needle cytology sample

Silicone lymphadenopathy is a recognized complication of breast augmentation. It is thought to occur when silicone droplets migrate from breast implants to lymph nodes. We report the cytologic findings in axillary and inguinal lymph node aspirate smears from a 35-year-old Italian woman, who came to our observation 10 years after bilateral cosmetic breast augmentation. A fine-needle cytology of the axillary lymph node showed extensive granulomatous inflammation, numerous histiocytes, and multinucleated giant cells containing star-shaped structures known as "asteroid bodies." The inguinal lymph node aspirate simply showed an aspecific reactive hyperplasia. No evidence of malignancy was present in any of the smears as well as in the excised axillary lymph node.

PIP breast implant removal: a study of 828 cases

In March, 2010, the French Health Products Safety Agency suspended the sale of prefilled silicone breast implants manufactured by Poly Implants Prosthèse Prothese (PIP) because of a high failure rate and the use of an inappropriate silicone gel that did not comply with CE marking. These findings led to an international medical crisis. In France, 30,000 female patients had PIP implants. In our Department, 1150 PIP breast implants had been implanted in 630 patients since 2001. A retrospective study was conducted to define the rupture rate of these implants and the complications that arise. The women included in the study underwent implant removal from May 2010 to September 2012 for preventive or curative reasons. Data were collected from medical records that included: results of clinical examination, breast ultrasound before removal, rates of implant rupture, results of biopsy of periprosthetic capsule and pericapsule tissue and postoperative complications. A total of 828 PIP breast implants were removed in 455 patients. The rate of ruptured implants was 7.73% (64/828), corresponding to 11.6% of patients. A periprosthetic effusion was associated with rupture in 44% of cases. Breast ultrasound indicated a rupture for 87 implants; 32% were true positives and 3% were false negatives. Periprosthetic capsule biopsy demonstrated the presence of a foreign body, which seemed to be silicone, in 26% of cases and the presence of inflammation in 13% of cases. No siliconoma-type lesion was identified in the pericapsular tissue at biopsy. A total of 14 implants presented perspiration at removal. A statistically significant difference was found between the rates of rupture for texturised implants as compared to the smooth-surfaced implants. There were eight post-revisional-surgery complications (1%) and three cases of breast adenocarcinoma. The preventive explantation of PIP breast implants is justified given the high failure rate (7.73%) and given patients' exposure to silicone gel that did not comply with CE standards in the absence of rupture, through the early perspiration of implants.

Silicone lymphadenopathy after breast augmentation: case reports, review of the literature, and current thoughts

BACKGROUND

Silicone lymphadenopathy after implantation of silicone breast implants is a foreign body reaction due to the release or migration of silicone into the tissues surrounding the breast implant.

METHODS

For the study, 14 cases of silicone lymphadenopathy were identified from the authors' files. Four patients had been implanted before 2000 and had various types of implants. The remaining 10 patients all were implanted between 2006 and 2009, and all had Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP) implants. In addition to an analysis of the authors' own cases, a thorough bibliographic search was initiated to identify all reports of lymphadenopathy related to silicone breast implants.

RESULTS

The implant age of the four patients implanted before 2000 was 12-34 years (mean, 17.25 years). The implant age of the 10 patients implanted after 2000 was 2-6 years (mean 3.45 years). The literature search identified 29 papers with case reports of silicone lymphadenopathy published between 1978 and 2012, with a total of 175 cases. Usable data were extracted from 164 of the 175 cases. Of these patients, 159 were implanted before (and including) the year 2000 and had a mean age of 11 years at presentation or explantation, and 5 of these patients were implanted after the year 2000 and had a mean age of 4.6 years at presentation or explantation . After inclusion of the authors' own cases, the mean age of the implants at presentation or explantation was 10.56 years in a total of 178 cases. Of these patients, 163 were implanted before (and including) the year 2000 and had a mean age of 11.16 years at presentation or explantation, and 15 of these patients were implanted after the year 2000 and had a mean age of 4.06 years at presentation or explantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Current breast implant technology has minimized the release of silicone gel due to rupture or bleeding of silicone and its migration into the surrounding tissues, thus reducing the rate of silicone lymphadenopathy in the last 10 years. The PIP implant scandal highlights the fact that disregard for the implant manufacturing technologies and standards in favor of higher profits increased rupture rates and gel diffusion, leading to increased local complication rates. Silicone lymphadenopathy is a foreign body reaction that does not warrant treatment unless it is symptomatic or interferes with breast cancer detection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Complications of Poly Implant Prothèse breast implants: the current discussion

Against the background of the current discussion about Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP, Seyne-sur-mer, France) breast implants, we want to present a case demonstrating the complications such as implant rupture, silicone dissemination and level III silicone lymphadenopathy. A 29-year-old woman with cosmetic breast augmentation with PIP implants 5 years previously showed a sensitive swelling in her right axilla and neck region. All tests to detect an infectious or lymphomatous lymphadenopathy were negative. After ultrasound and MRI, rupture of the right implant was assumed and multiple pathologically enlarged lymph nodes up to supraclavicular region were shown. An excision biopsy of one axillary lymph node was performed; the histological examination detected a strong silicone lymphadenopathy. Surgical removal of both implants as well as capsulectomy was performed and 14 axillary lymph nodes up to level II were resected. Histologic evaluation confirmed the previous results. Our case underlines the actual discussion concerning increased rupture rate and massive silicone lymphadenopathy by PIP implants. The Agence Francaise de Sécurité Sanitaire des Produits de Santé (AFSSAPS) recommends clinical and ultrasound examination every 6 months for women with PIP implants. Any rupture, suspected rupture or leakage of prosthesis should lead to its explantation as well as that of the contralateral implant. In cases of unusual signs of inflammation, histological and immunohistochemical samples are to be taken.