Linked Life Data

7938284

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/7938284

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
5
pubmed:dateCreated
1994-10-28
pubmed:abstractText
With the current controversy regarding the safety of silicone implants, the detection and evaluation of implant rupture are causing concern for both plastic surgeons and patients. Our study obtained comparative value analysis of mammography, sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection of silicone implant rupture. Twenty-nine symptomatic patients (total of 59 silicone implants) were entered into the study. Intraoperative findings revealed 21 ruptured implants (36 percent). During physical examination, a positive "squeeze test" was highly suggestive of implant rupture. Mammograms were obtained of 51 implants (sensitivity 11 percent, specificity 89 percent). Sonography was performed on 57 implants (sensitivity 70 percent, specificity 92 percent). MRI was performed on 55 implants (sensitivity 81 percent, specificity 92 percent). Sonographically, implant rupture is demonstrated by the "stepladder sign." Double-lumen implants may appear as false-positive results for rupture on sonography. On MRI, the "linguine sign" represents disrupted fragments of a ruptured implant. The most reliable imaging modality for implant rupture detection is MRI, followed by sonogram. Mammogram is the least reliable. Our study supports the clinical indication and diagnostic value of sonogram and MRI in the evaluation of symptomatic breast implant patients.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
AIM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Oct
pubmed:issn
0032-1052
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
94
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
620-7
pubmed:dateRevised
2011-2-16
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1994
pubmed:articleTitle
Comparative silicone breast implant evaluation using mammography, sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging: experience with 59 implants.
pubmed:affiliation
Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Clinical Trial, Comparative Study, Controlled Clinical Trial