Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 153(4): 730e-740e, 2024 Apr 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37224221

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Breast implant safety issues have resulted in the need for global product recalls and medical device tracing. Conventional methods of breast implant tracing, have to date proven to be unsuccessful. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of high-resolution ultrasound (HRUS) screening in identifying implanted breast devices. METHODS: Data from 113 female patients undergoing preoperative ultrasound screening for secondary breast surgery between 2019 and 2022 was prospectively reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of HRUS imaging with the aid of a sonographic surface catalog to identify the surface and brand type of implanted breast devices. To corroborate the findings and assess the reproducibility of the approach, further evaluations were replicated in New Zealand white rabbits and compared with the results found in humans. RESULTS: In the human recipients, implant surface and brand types were correctly identified by ultrasound imaging in 99% (112 of 113) and 96% (69 of 72) of the cases, either consultation-only or revision, respectively. This constituted an overall success rate of 98% (181 of 185). Furthermore, in a corroborating New Zealand white rabbit model where full-scale commercial implants were introduced and monitored over many months, from the total 28 analyzed, the surface was accurately identified in a total of 27 cases (the one failure being before generation of a sonograph surface catalogue), demonstrating an overall success rate of 96.4%. CONCLUSION: HRUS is, therefore, a valid and first-hand tool for breast implant imaging that can correctly evaluate both surface type and brand type alongside other variables such as implant placement, positioning, flipping, or rupture. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: HRUS is a valid and first-hand tool for the identification and traceability of breast implants that evaluates surface type and brand type. This low-cost, accessible, and reproducible practice provides patients with peace of mind and surgeons with a promising diagnostic tool.


Assuntos
Implante Mamário , Implantes de Mama , Humanos , Feminino , Animais , Coelhos , Géis de Silicone , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Falha de Prótese , Implante Mamário/métodos
2.
Aesthet Surg J ; 44(1): 50-59, 2023 Dec 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37577837

RESUMO

Breast cancer results in up to 1.6 million new candidates for yearly breast reconstruction (BR) surgery. Two-stage breast reconstruction surgery with the use of a tissue expander (TE) is a common approach to reconstructing the breast after mastectomy. However, a common disadvantage encountered with the traditional breast TE is the magnetic injection port, which has been reported to cause injuries in patients undergoing magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. Therefore this type of breast TE is labeled "MR unsafe." Recent technological advances have incorporated radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology in the TE to allow for the location of the injection port without magnetic components, resulting in an MR-conditional TE. This paper aims to review the information regarding the safety profile of TEs with magnetic ports and to gather distinct clinical scenarios in which an MR-conditional TE benefits the patient during the BR process. A literature review ranging from 2018 to 2022 was performed with the search terms: "tissue expander" OR "breast tissue expander" AND "magnetic resonance imaging" OR "MRI." Additionally, a case series was collected from each of the authors' practices. The literature search yielded 13 recent peer-reviewed papers, and 6 distinct clinical scenarios were compiled and discussed. Most clinicians find MRI examinations to be the state-of-art diagnostic imaging modality. However, due to the preexisting risks associated with TEs with magnetic ports, the MRI labeling classification should be considered when deciding which TE is the most appropriate for the patient requiring MRI examinations.


Assuntos
Implantes de Mama , Neoplasias da Mama , Mamoplastia , Humanos , Feminino , Mastectomia/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Mama/cirurgia , Neoplasias da Mama/etiologia , Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Mama/cirurgia , Mamoplastia/efeitos adversos , Mamoplastia/métodos , Expansão de Tecido/efeitos adversos , Expansão de Tecido/métodos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/efeitos adversos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Dispositivos para Expansão de Tecidos/efeitos adversos , Implantes de Mama/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...