Few Patients Undergo Recommended MRI Screening After Silicone Implant Breast Surgery
Only six percent of women with silicone breast implants followed the previous U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommendation for regular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening, suggests a study in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery®, the official medical journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS).
Despite discussion and information provided at the time of their breast implant procedure, most patients were unaware that MRI scans were recommended to detect asymptomatic implant rupture, according to the new research by Libby R. Copeland-Halperin, MD, of Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, and colleagues. They write, "Low adherence suggests that without repeated reinforcement, the importance of this recommendation may not be apparent to patients several years following surgery."
Low rate and awareness of follow-up MRI scans
Silicone breast implants are widely used for breast reconstruction as well as cosmetic breast augmentation. Among the possible complications is implant rupture – one of the leading reasons for implant removal, with special concern about silicone leakage. Although implant rupture can cause various symptoms, up to half of women with ruptured implants have no symptoms.
Starting in 2006, the FDA recommended routine MRI scans for detection of implant rupture, starting three years after surgery and every two years thereafter. However, clinical experience suggested that many patients did not follow this recommendation. "Unfortunately, because routine, asymptomatic follow-up visits several years postoperatively may not be covered by insurance policies and cosmetic procedures/follow-up are not covered by insurance, many patients may not return for follow-up around the time MRI would be due," the researchers write.
How many women got recommended screening scans? Dr. Copeland-Halperin and colleagues performed a telephone survey with patients who had undergone silicone breast implant surgery between 2011 and 2016. The women were asked whether they were aware of the FDA screening recommendation, whether and why they had follow-up MRI scans, and any barriers to screening.
Of 130 women contacted, 109 agreed to participate in the survey. Of these, 86 had silicone implants placed for breast reconstruction and 23 for breast augmentation.
Overall, 15.6% of women had undergone MRI at any time after implant placement. However, only 5.9% had MRI scans within the FDA-recommended timeframe. Adherence to MRI screening was no different for women who underwent reconstructive versus cosmetic implant placement. Screening rates were also similar by insurance status or income level.
In contrast, nearly half of the women (48.6%) had undergone ultrasound or mammography for various reasons – most commonly for breast cancer screening or breast pain. That included nearly three-fourths of women (73.3%) who later underwent MRI. The researchers note that ultrasound and mammography are less costly than MRI, but less effective in detecting implant rupture.
Of 17 women who had an MRI scan at any time after implant placement, just one cited routine implant surveillance as a reason for scanning. None of the MRI scans detected any abnormality with the implant. Just three of the women who did not undergo MRI were aware of the screening recommendation. They didn't undergo testing because they had no concerns about their implants or they "didn't like MRIs."
The study finds low rates of awareness and adherence to the recommendation to undergo routine MRI screening after breast silicone implant placement. "Whether MRI is the optimal imaging modality, uncertainty about its clinical utility, and concerns about the economic cost of the FDA recommendation are topics of debate, and many plastic surgeons do not agree with the recommendation," the researchers write.
In 2020, the FDA changed its surveillance recommendations to include ultrasound or MRI beginning 5 to 6 years after silicone implant placement and every 2 to 3 years thereafter. "Because our study was initiated before this change, we examined patient awareness of and adherence to the prior recommendations," Dr. Copeland-Halperin comments. "It is possible that the new guidelines may improve patient adherence, though further studies are needed to determine this. Similarly, the perception of the guidelines among plastic surgeons may also have changed with the updated recommendations."
Click here to read "Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening after Silicone Implant Breast Surgery: Patient Survey of Adherence to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Recommendations"
Article: "Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening after Silicone Implant Breast Surgery: Patient Survey of Adherence to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Recommendations" (doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000009317)
About Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
For over 75 years, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. The official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair and cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medico-legal issues.
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) is the largest organization of board-certified plastic surgeons in the world. Representing more than 11,000 physician members worldwide, the society is recognized as a leading authority and information source on cosmetic and reconstructive plastic surgery. ASPS comprises more than 92 percent of all board-certified plastic surgeons in the United States. Founded in 1931, the society represents physicians certified by The American Board of Plastic Surgery or The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada.
About Wolters Kluwer
Wolters Kluwer (WKL) is a global leader in professional information, software solutions and services for the clinicians, nurses, accountants, lawyers and tax, finance, audit, risk, compliance and regulatory sectors. We help our customers make critical decisions every day by providing expert solutions that combine deep domain knowledge with advanced technology and services.
Wolters Kluwer reported 2020 annual revenues of €4.6 billion. The group serves customers in over 180 countries, maintains operations in over 40 countries, and employs approximately 19,200 people worldwide. The company is headquartered in Alphen aan den Rijn, the Netherlands.
Wolters Kluwer provides trusted clinical technology and evidence-based solutions that engage clinicians, patients, researchers and students in effective decision-making and outcomes across healthcare. We support clinical effectiveness, learning and research, clinical surveillance and compliance, as well as data solutions. For more information about our solutions, visit https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/health and follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter @WKHealth.