Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Citing Articles
Right arrowScopus Links
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gaubitz, M.
Right arrow Articles by Pfleiderer, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gaubitz, M.
Right arrow Articles by Pfleiderer, B.
Related Collections
Right arrow Diagnostics and Imaging Procedures
Right arrow Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Autoimmunity
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Rheumatology 2002; 41: 129-135
© 2002 British Society for Rheumatology


Original papers

Silicone breast implants: correlation between implant ruptures, magnetic resonance spectroscopically estimated silicone presence in the liver, antibody status and clinical symptoms

M. Gaubitz, C. Jackisch1, W. Domschke, W. Heindel2 and B. Pfleiderer

Department of Medicine B,
1 Department of Gynecology and
2 Department of Radiology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany

Objective. To determine the impact of implant integrity on clinical symptoms and antibody status in women with silicone breast implants (SBIs).

Methods. Ninety consecutive women were examined by means of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to assess the integrity of their silicone breast implants. The presence of silicone in the liver was estimated by 1H localized stimulated echo acquisition mode (STEAM) magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS). Results were correlated with patients' complaints, as evaluated by a standardized questionnaire, physical examination by a rheumatologist and antibody screening.

Results. Breast MRI revealed defects in 24 patients (26.6%); in 13 (54.2%) of these women, silicone was detected in the liver by MRS. Of the 66 patients with MRI-estimated intact implants, 15 (22.7%) had apparent silicone in their liver, arguing for gel bleeding. Clinically, two patients had had rheumatoid arthritis before SBIs, whereas the other patients revealed no typical symptoms of arthritis or connective tissue disease (CTD). The patients with MRS evidence of silicone in the liver had no statistically significant differences in their complaints with the exception of the most frequent symptom, tingling/numbness of the fingers (82.1 vs 51.6%, P=0.006). A positive pattern of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) was obtained in 13 of the 28 MRS-positive patients (46.4%) and in 15 of the 62 MRS-negative patients (24.2%, P=0.033). However, in only one of these 28 ANA-positive patients was a specific weak antibody titre against SS-A detected by ELISA.

Conclusion. Implant integrity has no major impact on rheumatic symptoms of women with SBIs. This finding supports the standpoint that silicone does not cause either a specific CTD or any other distinct disease entity. However, the moderately increased incidences of ANA-positivity and neuropathy-associated symptoms require explanation.

KEY WORDS: Silicone implants, Rheumatic symptoms, MR spectroscopy.

Correspondence to: M. Gaubitz, Department of Medicine B, University of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Strasse 33, D-48129 Münster, Germany.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
D. T. Sharpe
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): 123 - 124.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.