Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harris, K. M.
Right arrow Articles by Tobon, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Harris, K. M.
Right arrow Articles by Tobon, H.

Radiology, Vol 187, 761-768, Copyright © 1993 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Silicone implant rupture: detection with US

KM Harris, MA Ganott, KC Shestak, HW Losken and H Tobon
Department of Radiology, Magee-Womens Hospital Breast Care and Diagnostic Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, PA 15213.

The authors evaluated the ability of ultrasound (US) in detection of silicone implant ruptures and compared US detection with that of mammography and physical examination in 22 women with 29 sites of implant leakage. On sonograms, leaks were evident from a highly echogenic pattern of scattered and reverberating echoes with loss of detail posterior to the echogenic area. The area appears as a "snowstorm" and has a well-defined anterior margin but a poorly defined posterior margin. Twenty-five sites in 19 women were surgically confirmed. Mammograms obtained with various views and sonograms were available for comparison in 20 of 25 surgically confirmed leaks. Of all 29 leaks, 14 were detected at physical examination as palpable masses. Six of these 20 leaks were not detected with mammography. With US, only one leak was not detected. US allowed more accurate prediction of the extent of free silicone in the breast and enabled detection of silicone within axillary nodes. Recognition of the characteristic highly echogenic sonographic appearance of microglobules of free silicone in the soft tissues can improve detection of implant rupture.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. Erguvan-Dogan and W. T. Yang
Direct injection of paraffin into the breast: mammographic, sonographic, and MRI features of early complications.
Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2006; 186(3): 888 - 894.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
W. A. Berg, T. K. Nguyen, M. S. Middleton, M. S. Soo, G. Pennello, and S. L. Brown
MR Imaging of Extracapsular Silicone from Breast Implants: Diagnostic Pitfalls
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2002; 178(2): 465 - 472.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
C. I. Caskey, W. A. Berg, U. M. Hamper, S. Sheth, B. W. Chang, and N. D. Anderson
Imaging Spectrum of Extracapsular Silicone: Correlation of US, MR Imaging, Mammographic, and Histopathologic Findings
RadioGraphics, October 1, 1999; 19(90001): 39 - 51.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 Journal of Diagnostic Medical SonographyHome page
S. Lu, G. A. Rouse, and M. De Lange
Sonoographic Detection of Silicone Breast Implant Rupture
Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, January 1, 1995; 11(1): 3 - 8.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1993 by the Radiological Society of North America.