A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

False-positive diagnoses of damaged breast implants on imaging: a report of two cases. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • Silicone breast implants (SBIs) are durable but require regular imaging to check for ruptures, as symptoms may not be noticeable.
  • Imaging can sometimes produce false positives for SBI failure due to artifacts or other factors, which has been highlighted in two case studies.
  • In both cases, while imaging indicated potential SBI issues, intraoperative examinations showed no fractures, underscoring the need for careful interpretation of imaging results.

Article Abstract

Background: Silicone breast implants (SBIs), used in breast reconstruction, are durable and resistant to breakage and internal gel leakage. However, regular imaging examinations are crucial, as symptoms may not be apparent even if the implant ruptures. There are several known imaging findings that suggest SBI failure. Although artifacts such as moisture and air bubbles or substances similar to the gel extending outside the shell may appear on imaging, no reports have demonstrated false-positive diagnoses of damaged SBIs in detail. Hence, we present two cases in which failure was suspected based on the imaging results but not confirmed.

Case Description: In case 1, at the 4-year follow-up after implant-based breast reconstruction, ultrasonography revealed a stepladder sign, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed the salad oil sign. Although SBI failure was suggested, intraoperative examination revealed only a small amount of fluid retention within the capsule and no SBI fractures. Consequently, the imaging results were proved to be artifacts. In case 2, at the 7-year follow-up after implant-based breast reconstruction, ultrasonography revealed a subcapsular line sign, and MRI confirmed a keyhole sign. Although SBI failure was suggested, intraoperative examination revealed no implant fractures. Hematogenous serous effusion was found within the capsule, and blood clots and a large amount of fibrinous mass were found deposited at the bottom of the capsule. These findings caused false-positive diagnoses on imaging.

Conclusions: In cases of suspected fractures, patients may opt for either observation or surgical removal, or replacement of the implant. When choosing the latter, it is important to inform patients of the possibility of an unbroken implant.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10660183PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/gs-23-255DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

false-positive diagnoses
12
breast reconstruction
12
sbi failure
12
diagnoses damaged
8
breast implants
8
follow-up implant-based
8
implant-based breast
8
reconstruction ultrasonography
8
ultrasonography revealed
8
sign sbi
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!