The diagnosis of silicone breast-implant rupture: clinical findings compared with findings at magnetic resonance imaging.
cross_sectional · Level IV
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 15900139.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The objective was to evaluate the usefulness of clinical examination in the evaluation of breast-implant integrity, using the diagnosis at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the "gold standard." Fifty-five women with 109 implants underwent a breast examination either just before or shortly after an MRI examination. Twenty-four of 109 implants were clinically diagnosed with possible rupture or rupture. Eighteen of the 24 implants were ruptured according to the MRI examination (75%). Eighty-five implants were clinically classified as intact, and 43 of these were actually ruptured at MRI (51%). The sensitivity of the clinical examination for diagnosing rupture was thus 30% and the specificity 88%. The positive predictive value of a clinical diagnosis of rupture was 75%, and the negative predictive value was 49%. In this study, we found that when a clinical examination is used as the sole diagnostic tool to identify implant rupture, neither the sensitivity nor the specificity is acceptable.
Medical subject headings
- Breast Implantation
- Breast Implants
- Postoperative Complications
- Prosthesis Failure