Specific characteristics and challenges associated with breast cancer diagnostics in women after breast augmentation and reconstructive surgeries with implants

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Background. The number of plastic surgeries is constantly growing worldwide. Breast augmentation remains the most common surgical procedure in women, which demonstrated a 0.5 % increase over the past 4 years. As the number of women with breast implants increases, specialists and patients themselves face difficulties related to screening, diagnosis, and treatment of tumors, including breast cancer.
Aim. To analyze specific characteristics of breast examination in patients after breast augmentation who were examined and treated in the mammological clinic of Russian Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation.
Materials and methods. This study included 273 patients aged between 21 and 63 years (mean age 49.0 ± 7.6 years) after breast augmentation and after reconstructive surgery for breast cancer and symmetrizing surgery on the contralateral side. All women underwent clinical examination plus breast ultrasound (for patients under 40 years of age) or mammography followed by ultrasound (patients over 40 years of age). Patients who were found to have BI-RADS 3–4 tumors underwent ultrasound-guided or stereotactic breast biopsy. In case of suspicious intraductal formations according to breast nipple smears the patients were referred to breast ductography. Patients with suspected implant rupture or capsular contracture, as well as patients requiring the assessment of the disease stage underwent contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.
Results. After comprehensive examination, 12 patients (5.4 %) were diagnosed with breast cancer; 38 patients (13.9 %), with implant rupture; 3 patients (1 %), with intraductal formations.
Conclusion. Breast augmentation is not a contraindication to mammography in women aged over 40 years with glandular tissue. Additional examination methods include breast ultrasound, contrast-enhanced mammography, and breast magnetic resonance imaging. In case of no glandular tissue, contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging and breast ultrasound are the methods of choice. It is important to develop new standards of screening and diagnosis of breast diseases in women after aesthetic surgery, since breast cancer incidence is likely to increase among women after breast augmentation over the next decades, considering the fact that breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women and its incidence is constantly growing.

About the authors

O. S. Khodorovich

Russian Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia

ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6014-4597

86 Profsoyuznaya St., Moscow 117997

Russian Federation

V. A. Solodkiy

Russian Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia

ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1641-6452

86 Profsoyuznaya St., Moscow 117997

Russian Federation

T. V. Sherstneva

Russian Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia

ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3261-0984

86 Profsoyuznaya St., Moscow 117997

Russian Federation

L. B. Kanakhina

Russian Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Author for correspondence.
Email: glb.1994@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0260-1478

Liya Beketaevna Kanakhina

86 Profsoyuznaya St., Moscow 117997

Russian Federation

Sh. M. Dibirova

Russian Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia

ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9657-7776

86 Profsoyuznaya St., Moscow 117997

Russian Federation

References

  1. Global survey 2021: Full report and press release in English. Available at: https://www.isaps.org/discover/about-isaps/globalstatistics/reports-and-press-releases/global-survey-2021-fullreport-and-press-releases/.
  2. Voblaya I.N., Koroleva N.V., Moreeva E.G. The marketing analysis of plastic surgery market in Russia. Problemy sotsialnoy gigieny, zdravookhraneniya i istorii meditsiny = Problems of social hygiene, health care and history of medicine 2020;28(2):227–33. (In Russ.). doi: 10.32687/0869-866X-2020-28-2-227-233
  3. Khodorovich O.S., Solodkiy V.A., Sarkisyan K.D. et al. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer. Plasticheskaya khirurgiya i esteticheskaya meditsina = Plastic surgery and aesthetic medicine. 2022;(1):32–40. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17116/plast.hirurgia202201132
  4. ХReconstructive plastic surgery with an expander/implant and radiation therapy for breast cancer. Vestnik rossiyskogo nauchnogo tsentra rentgenoradiologii = Bulletin of the Russian Scientific Center of X-ray Radiology 2020;20(1):1–14. (In Russ.)
  5. Arslanov Kh.S., Zikiryakhodzhaev A.D., Usov F.N. et al. Remedial surgery and possible complications after reconstructive plastic interventions into the breast. Onkologiya. Zhurnal im. P.A. Gercena = P.A. Herzen Journal of Oncology 2015;4(4):12–7. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17116/onkolog20154412-17
  6. Solodkiy V.A., Khodorovich O.S., Sarkisyan K.D. et al. Symmetrizing interventions in conservative and reconstructive operations in patients with breast cancer. Vestnik rossiyskogo nauchnogo tsentra rentgenoradiologii = Bulletin of the Russian Scientific Center of X-ray Radiology 2019;19(2):52–63. (In Russ.).
  7. Hoshaw S.J., Klein P.J., Clark B. et al. Breast implants and cancer: Сausation, delayed detection, and survival. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;107:1393–407. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200105000-00012
  8. Tuli R., Flynn R., Brill K. et al. Diagnosis, treatment, and management of breast cancer in previously augmented women. Breast J 2006;12:343–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1075-122X.2006.00273.x
  9. Noels E., Lapid O., Lindeman J. et al. Breast implants and the risk of breast cancer: А meta-analysis of cohort studies. Aesthet Surg 2015;35(1):55–62. doi: 10.1093/asj/sju006
  10. Khodorovich O.S., Solodkiy V.A., Kalinina-Masri A.A. et al. Breast cancer in patients after augmentation with implants. Voprosy onkologii = Oncology issues 2021;(4):518–24. (In Russ.) doi: 10.37469/0507-3758-2021-67-4-518-524
  11. Gidengil C., Predmore Z., Mattke S. et al. Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma: A systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135(3):713–20. doi: 10.1097/prs.0000000000001037
  12. Meuniera A., Tristantb H., Sinna R., Delay R. Mammary implants and breast cancer. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2005;50(5):595–604. doi: 10.1016/j.anplas.2005.07.015
  13. Skinner K.A., Silberman H., Dougherty W. et al. Breast cancer after augmentation mammoplasty. Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8(2):138–44.
  14. Tristant H., Hazebroucq V., Lucidarme O. Lésions infracliniques et prothèses mammaires. Étude de 30 cancers sur prostheses. J Le Sein 1999;9(4):237–46.
  15. Rintala A.E., Svinhufvud U.M. Effect of augmentation mammaplasty on mammography and thermography. Plast Reconstr Surg 1974;54:390–6.
  16. Gumucio C.A., Pin P., Young V.L. et al. The effect of breast implants on the radiographic detection of microcalcification and soft-tissue masses. Plast Reconstr Surg 1989;84:772–8.
  17. McIntosh S.A., Horgan K. Augmentation mammoplasty: Effect on diagnosis of breast cancer. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2007;61(2):124–9. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2007.06.035
  18. Eklund G.W., Busby R.C., Miller S.H. et al. Improved imaging of the augmented breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1988;151:469–73.
  19. Smathers R.L., Boone J.M., Lee L.J. et al. Radiation dose reduction for augmentation mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:1414–21.
  20. Fajardo L.L., Harvey J.A., McAleese K.A. et al. Breast cancer diagnosis in women with subglandular silicone gel filled augmentation implants. Radioilogy 1995;194:859–62.
  21. Kolb T.M., Lichy J., Newhouse J.H. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002;225:165–75.
  22. Kaplan S.S. Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology 2001;221:641–9.
  23. Gordon P.B., Goldenberg S.L. Malignant breast masses detected only by ultrasound: A retrospective review. Cancer.1995;76:626–30.
  24. Lewis-Jones H.G., Whitehouse G.H., Leinster S.J. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of local recurrent breast carcinoma. Clin Radiol 1991;43:197–204.
  25. Orel S.G., Schnall M.D., LiVolsi V.A. et al. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1994;190(2):485–93. doi: 10.1148/radiology.190.2.8284404
  26. Uematsu T. Screening and diagnosis of breast cancer in augmented women. Breast Cancer 2008;15:159–64. doi: 10.1007/s12282-008-0036-1
  27. Lannin D.R., Ponn T., Andrejeva L. et al. Should all breast cancers be diagnosed by needle biopsy? Am J Surg 2006;192:450–4.
  28. Jackman R.J., Lamm R.L. Stereotactic histologic biopsy in breasts with implants. Radiology 2002;222:157–64. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2221010231
  29. Gorczyca D.P., Gorczyca S.M., Gorczyca K.L. The diagnosis of silicone breast implant rupture. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;120:49–61. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000286569.45745.6a5ing

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2023



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77 - 36991 от  21.07.2009.