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 Gorczyca, D. P.
Right arrow Articles by Bassett, L. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gorczyca, D. P.
Right arrow Articles by Bassett, L. W.

Radiology, Vol 190, 227-232, Copyright © 1994 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Silicone breast implant ruptures in an animal model: comparison of mammography, MR imaging, US, and CT

DP Gorczyca, ND DeBruhl, CY Ahn, A Hoyt, JW Sayre, P Nudell, M McCombs, WW Shaw and LW Bassett
Iris Cantor Center for Breast Imaging, Department of Radiological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles.

PURPOSE: To determine the most accurate imaging modality for detection of silicone implant ruptures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty single-lumen silicone implants were surgically placed in 20 rabbits. Each rabbit received one intact and one ruptured implant and was examined with mammography, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, ultrasound (US), and computed tomography (CT). Five radiologists reviewed all images in a random fashion and graded each for rupture. The radiologist who performed US also graded her impression during examination with US. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed. RESULTS: MR imaging and CT were the most accurate modalities in detection of implant ruptures, with areas under the ROC curves (Az) of .95 and .91. Mammography and US were statistically significantly inferior, with Az of .77 for each (P < .05). CONCLUSION: MR imaging and CT are statistically more accurate than US and mammography for detection of intracapsular silicone implant ruptures when only the images are reviewed.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Arch SurgHome page
L. R. Holmich, S. Friis, J. P. Fryzek, I. M. Vejborg, C. Conrad, S. Sletting, K. Kjoller, J. K. McLaughlin, and J. H. Olsen
Incidence of Silicone Breast Implant Rupture
Arch Surg, July 1, 2003; 138(7): 801 - 806.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
M. Gaubitz, C. Jackisch, W. Domschke, W. Heindel, and B. Pfleiderer
Silicone breast implants: correlation between implant ruptures, magnetic resonance spectroscopically estimated silicone presence in the liver, antibody status and clinical symptoms
Rheumatology, February 1, 2002; 41(2): 129 - 135.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
L. W. Bassett, D. M. Farria, S. Bansal, M. A. Farquhar, P. A. Wilcox, and S. A. Feig
Reasons for Failure of a Mammography Unit at Clinical Image Review in the American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program
Radiology, June 1, 2000; 215(3): 698 - 702.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1994 by the Radiological Society of North America.