Author:
Ho Isabel W.,Chichura Anna,Pederson Holly J.,Xavier Brian A.,Ritner Julie,Schwarz Graham S.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Recommendations for breast surveillance following breast plastic surgery are frequently changing. Establishing guidelines for long-term monitoring protocols may help identify treatable conditions and prevent untoward sequelae. We sought to evaluate the current state of evidence-based long-term monitoring protocols for patients following breast augmentation, reduction, and breast reconstruction.
Methods
Official guidelines from various American societies and international societies were analyzed for alignment in evidence-based recommendations regarding breast surveillance.
Results
The most recent US FDA update recommends magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound starting 5–6 years after surgery and every 2–3 years thereafter. Discrepancies exist among professional societies: the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) aligns with the FDA, while the American Society of Breast Surgeons and American College of Radiology (ACR) find no role for imaging for asymptomatic cases. Ultrasound is first-line for any implant concerns, with MRI if necessary. European societies oppose routine breast implant imaging. Breast reduction patients lack unique screening protocols; monitoring aligns with age and cancer risk factors. Following mastectomy and breast reconstruction, most organizations advocate for annual clinical examinations, with more frequent examinations initially. Evidence suggests that physical examination is sufficient to detect local cancer recurrence, with imaging only indicated if there is concern for recurrence. No surveillance imaging is recommended by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, or ASPS; however, ACR recommends mammography for autologous reconstruction only.
Conclusion
Multispecialty and regulatory body alignment may promote provider and patient adherence. Ongoing studies of long-term outcomes are needed to strengthen the level of evidence for monitoring guidelines.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference120 articles.
1. US Food and Drug Administration. Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Update on the Safety of Silicone Gel Filled-Breast Implants. Published online June 2011. https://www.fda.gov/media/80685/download.
2. Lindenblatt N, Helbich T, Deutinger M, Benditte-Klepetko H, Czembirek H, El Rabadi K. Correlation between MRI results and intraoperative findings in patients with silicone breast implants. Int J Womens Health. 2014;6:703–9. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S58493.
3. Gorczyca DP, Gorczyca SM, Gorczyca KL. The diagnosis of silicone breast implant rupture. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120(Suppl 1):49S-61S. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000286569.45745.6a.
4. Moyer HR, Ghazi BH, Losken A. The effect of silicone gel bleed on capsular contracture: A generational study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130(4):793–800. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e318262f174.
5. Juanpere S, Perez E, Huc O, Motos N, Pont J, Pedraza S. Imaging of breast implants—a pictorial review. Insights Imaging. 2011;2(6):653–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-011-0122-3.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献