Symptom Improvement After Explantation With No Capsulectomy for Systemic Symptoms Associated With Breast Implants.

BACKGROUND: The previously published Aesthetic Foundation (ASERF) biospecimen study documented systemic symptom improvement after implant removal regardless of the type of capsulectomy performed. A limitation of that study was that all subjects had at least some capsule removed for biospecimen analysis of heavy metals, microbes, and capsule histology. OBJECTIVES: Systemic symptoms associated with breast implants (SSBI) describes a group of patients who attribute a variety of symptoms to their implants. Previous studies have shown symptom improvement after implant removal in these patients which is independent of whether part or all the implant capsule has been removed. This study evaluates implant removal with no capsule removed in symptomatic and control subjects. METHODS: Eligible study subjects were sequentially enrolled at five investigator sites. The SSBI Cohort included patients with systemic symptoms they attributed to their implants requesting explantation. The non-SSBI Cohort included subjects without systemic symptoms attributed to their implants, requesting explantation with or without replacement. All subjects agreed to undergo explantation without removal of any capsule. RESULTS: Systemic symptom improvement was noted in SSBI subjects without removal of the implant capsule, comparable to the results of our previously published study. SSBI patients showed a 74% reduction in self-reported symptoms at six months with no capsulectomy which was not statistically different from partial or total capsulectomies (p = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Explantation with or without capsulectomy provides symptom improvement in patients with systemic symptoms they associate with their implants.

IL-9 is a Biomarker of BIA-ALCL Detected Rapidly By Lateral Flow Assay.

BACKGROUND: A delayed seroma around breast implants is the most common clinical presentation of BIA-ALCL. However, most seromas are due to benign causes. Therefore, it is essential to distinguish benign seromas from seromas due to BIA-ALCL. In a prior study mean concentrations of IL-9, IL-10 and IL-13 were found to be significantly higher in BIA-ALCL than in benign seromas. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this research was to test the ability to detect high concentrations of IL-9 rapidly with a lateral flow assay (LFA). Because we previously reported that a LFA for CD30 detected BIA-ALCL in seromas we compared CD30 and IL-9 LFAs in distinguishing BIA-ALCL from benign seromas. METHODS: Thirty microliter samples of 26 seromas (15 benign, 11 malignant) were tested on in-house prepared strips for IL-9 and CD30. Nanoparticle-conjugated antibodies specific to IL-9 and CD30 were used for detection. IL-9 was analyzed in undiluted samples and CD30 samples were optimized at 1:3 dilution. The dynamic range of detection was determined by spiking recombinant IL-9 into a benign seroma. Image analysis measured intensity of both test line (TL) and control line (CL) and a TL/CL ratio was calculated. IL-9 protein and IL-9 transcription factor PU.1 were stained in BIA-ALCL lines and clinical samples. RESULTS: The IL-9 LFA was reliable in distinguishing BIA-ALCL from benign seromas when the concentration of IL-9 was greater than 10 ng/ml. The CD30 LFA was positive in all 11 malignant cases. In one case with only faint CD30 and IL-10 test lines, the IL-9 LFA was clearly positive. Immunohistochemistry showed IL-9 and its essential transcription factor PU.1 were present in tumor cells in BIA-ALCL lines and clinical samples. CONCLUSIONS: IL-9 is a tumor cell biomarker of BIA-ALCL that can be detected by lateral flow assay and immunohistochemistry. Concentrations of IL-9 greater than 10 ng/ml reliably distinguished BIA-ALCL from benign seromas. Moreover, IL-9 LFA could detect BIA-ALCL when CD30 LFA was not definitive and IL-10 was of low concentration with a faint IL-10 TL, suggesting a multiplex LFA including IL-9, CD30 and IL-10 might be more effective in detecting BIA-ALCL in selected cases.

The Efficacy and Associated Learning Curve of Office-Based High-Resolution Ultrasound to Detect Shell Failure in Breast Implants.

BACKGROUND: High-resolution ultrasound (HRUS) is widely employed in plastic surgery practices to detect implant rupture prior to revisional surgery. Published research has found a good overall accuracy of shell failure detection. The literature often references a learning curve associated with incorporating this imaging technique into a medical practice, but it has yet to be visualized or defined. OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to calculate current testing statistics for use of HRUS to detect shell failure and to define the learning curve associated with the predicted improvement reflected by statistics of test and surgeon proficiency. METHODS: A retrospective review of sequential in-office HRUSs on patients with breast implants was conducted across 2 plastic surgery practices. Preoperative ultrasound reports and intraoperative findings were compared. Test statistics were calculated for each group of 10 subsequent patients, and a regression analysis was performed to define the learning curve. RESULTS: A total of 480 implants were examined and averages for all test statistics were calculated. All were higher than most of the previously reported literature standards. The regression analysis showed a linear improvement for both sensitivity and specificity over time, with significant improvement in sensitivity. CONCLUSION: Results show that HRUS is highly effective in detecting shell failure in breast implants. There is also a calculable linear improvement for all test values of the HRUS over time. Surgeons were able to remain above the literature standard for sensitivity after their 60th HRUS reading. This improvement shows that continued use and practice of the imaging technique allow for more accurate findings.

Microbes, Histology, Blood Analysis, Enterotoxins, and Cytokines: Findings From the ASERF Systemic Symptoms in Women-Biospecimen Analysis Study: Part 3.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increasing need to acquire rigorous scientific data to answer the concerns of physicians, patients, and the FDA regarding the self-reported illness identified as breast implant illness (BII). There are no diagnostic tests or specific laboratory values to explain the reported systemic symptoms described by these patients. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine if there are quantifiable laboratory findings that can be identified in blood, capsule tissue pathology, or microbes that differentiate women with systemic symptoms they attribute to their implants from 2 control groups. METHODS: A prospective blinded study enrolled 150 subjects into 3 cohorts: (A) women with systemic symptoms they attribute to implants who requested implant removal; (B) women with breast implants requesting removal or exchange who did not have symptoms attributed to implants; and (C) women undergoing cosmetic mastopexy who have never had any implanted medical device. Capsule tissue underwent detailed analysis and blood was sent from all 3 cohorts to evaluate for markers of inflammation. RESULTS: No significant histologic differences were identified between the cohorts, except there were more capsules with synovial metaplasia in the non-BII cohort. There was no statistical difference in thyroid-stimulating hormone, vitamin D levels, or complete blood count with differential between the cohorts. Next-generation sequencing revealed no statistically significant difference in positivity between Cohort A and B. Of the 12 cytokines measured, 3 cytokines, interleukin (IL)-17A, IL-13, and IL-22, were found to be significantly more often elevated in sera of subjects in Cohort A than in Cohorts B or C. The enterotoxin data demonstrated an elevation in immunoglobulin G (IgG) anti-Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin A in Cohort A. There was no correlation between the presence of IgE or IgG anti-Staphylococcal antibody and a positive next-generation sequencing result. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the current literature by demonstrating few identifiable biomedical markers to explain the systemic symptoms self-reported by patients with BII.

Longevity of Post-Explantation Systemic Symptom Improvement and Potential Etiologies: Findings From the ASERF Systemic Symptoms in Women-Biospecimen Analysis Study: Part 4.

BACKGROUND: Breast Implant Illness (BII) describes a variety of symptoms reported by patients with breast implants. Biospecimens data revealed minimal statistical differences between BII and non-BII cohorts. Baseline analysis of PROMIS data demonstrated significant differences between the BII cohort and the 2 control cohorts. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to determine if patients in the BII cohort obtained any symptom improvement after explantation, whether symptom improvement was related to the type of capsulectomy, and which symptoms improved. METHODS: A prospective blinded study enrolled 150 consecutive patients divided equally into 3 cohorts. Baseline demographic data and a systemic symptoms survey, including PROMIS validated questionnaires, were obtained at baseline, 3 to 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients were enrolled between 2019 and 2021. Follow-up at 1 year included 94% of the BII cohort and 77% of non-BII and mastopexy cohorts. At 1 year, 88% of patients showed at least partial symptom improvement, with a reduction of 2 to 20 symptoms. The PROMIS score in the BII cohort decreased at 1 year for anxiety, sleep disturbances, and fatigue. Systemic symptom improvement was noted out to 1 year in the BII cohort regardless of the type of capsulectomy performed. CONCLUSIONS: Parts 1-3 in this series concluded that there were no consistent differences in biospecimen results between the cohorts. Unlike the data observed in the biospecimen analysis, BII patients had heightened symptoms and poorer PROMIS scores at baseline compared to the control cohorts. The reduction of negative expectations and a potential nocebo effect could contribute to this improvement.

Conflict of Interest in Research and Publication: Has the Pendulum Swung Too Far?

Traditionally scientists and industry have collaborated to contribute to the development of new drugs, biologics, and medical devices. Conflicts of interest (COI) may develop among surgeons and academic researchers, especially during the process of refinement of techniques and the marketing and sale of devices. Dramatic examples of COI occurred over the last 50 years, leading to strict regulations designed to reduce COI at research institutions. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors created COI guidelines to help authors and editors ensure clear, reproducible, and unbiased medical articles. The Physician Payments Sunshine Act was designed to increase transparency of financial relationships between physicians and industry. However, in some cases authors and scientists are not obligated to fully disclose their COI. Only direct payments are required to be reported, not indirect payments to faculty at large academic institutions, allowing some to take advantage of the exceptions to the disclosure requirements whereas others must disclose payment for their work effort. Based on prominent scandals, regulations aimed at reducing industry influence in research and publication may fail to recognize the potential benefits of collaboration and produce a narrow-minded view of trust. Where should an editorial board or an academic institution draw the line?

Heavy Metals in Breast Implant Capsules and Breast Tissue: Findings from the Systemic Symptoms in Women-Biospecimen Analysis Study: Part 2.

BACKGROUND: Breast Implant Illness (BII), as described in recent medical literature and by social media, describes a range of symptoms in patients with breast implants for which there are no physical findings or laboratory results that explain their symptoms. OBJECTIVES: Part 2 of this study aims to determine whether heavy metals are present in the capsules around saline and silicone implants and if there are statistical differences in the type or level of these metals between women with or without symptoms. Demographic data was collected to investigate potential alternate sources of metals: inhaled, absorbed, or ingested. METHODS: A prospective, blinded study enrolled 150 consecutive subjects divided equally into in three cohorts: (A) women with systemic symptoms they attribute to their implants who requested implant removal, (B) women with breast implants requesting removal or exchange who do not have symptoms they attribute to their implants, and (C) women undergoing cosmetic mastopexy who have never had any implanted medical device. Capsule tissue was removed from Cohort A and B for analysis of 22 heavy metals. Additionally, breast tissue was obtained from a control group with no previous exposure to any implanted medical device. RESULTS: The study was performed between 2019-2021. Heavy metal content was compared between the capsule tissue from Cohort A and B. The only statistically significant differences identified in Cohort A were higher levels of arsenic and zinc, and lower levels of cobalt, manganese, silver, and tin. There were no elevated levels or statistically significant differences in the other metals tested between Cohorts A and B. CONCLUSIONS: This study analyzes the metal content in capsules surrounding both saline and silicone breast implants. Heavy metals were also detected in the non-implant control group breast tissue, with some metals at numerically higher levels than either breast implant cohort. Smoking, gluten free diets, dietary supplements, and the presence of tattoos were all identified as statistically significant sources of arsenic and zinc in Cohort A. The risk of heavy metal toxicity should not be used as an indication for total capsulectomy if patients elect to remove their breast implants.

Impact of Capsulectomy Type on Post-Explantation Systemic Symptom Improvement: Findings From the ASERF Systemic Symptoms in Women-Biospecimen Analysis Study: Part 1.

BACKGROUND: Breast Implant Illness (BII) is a term used to describe a variety of symptoms by patients with breast implants for which there are no abnormal physical or laboratory findings to explain their symptoms. There currently exists a difference of opinion among clinicians and patients concerning the diagnosis and treatment of patients self-reporting BII. OBJECTIVES: The first aim of this study was to determine if there is a valid indication for "en bloc" capsulectomy in patients self-reporting BII and if the type of capsulectomy performed alters long-term symptom improvement. The second goal was to identify any clinical laboratory differences between the cohorts. This study was funded by the Aesthetic Surgery Education and Research Foundation (ASERF). METHODS: A prospective blinded study enrolled 150 consecutive subjects divided equally into 3 cohorts: (A) women with systemic symptoms they attribute to their implants who requested implant removal; (B) women with breast implants requesting removal or exchange who do not have symptoms they attribute to their implants; and (C) women undergoing cosmetic mastopexy who have never had any implanted medical device. The subject's baseline demographic data and a systemic symptoms survey, including PROMIS validated questionnaires, was obtained before surgery and at 3-6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Blood was collected from all 3 cohorts and implant capsules were collected from Cohorts A and B. RESULTS: 150 patients were enrolled between 2019-2021. Follow-up at 3-6 weeks for all 3 cohorts was between 98%-100%, 78%-98% at 6-months, and 1 year data is currently at 80%. The type of capsulectomy; intact total, total, or partial all showed similar symptom improvement with no statistical difference in the reduction of symptoms based on the type of capsulectomy. CONCLUSIONS: This study addresses one of the most discussed questions by plastic surgeons, patients, their advocates, and social media. The findings show that patients who self-report BII demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in their symptoms after explantation and that this improvement persists for at least 6 months. This improvement in self-reported systemic symptoms was seen regardless of the type of capsulectomy performed.

Granzyme B Is a Biomarker for Suspicion of Malignant Seromas Around Breast Implants.

BACKGROUND: Granzyme B (GrB) is a serine protease secreted, along with pore-forming perforin, by cytotoxic lymphocytes to mediate apoptosis in target cells. GrB has been detected in tumor cells associated with systemic and breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) but its potential use for detection of early BIA-ALCL has not been fully investigated. OBJECTIVES: Prompted by the increased incidence of BIA-ALCL, the aim of this study was to assess GrB as a new biomarker to detect early disease in malignant seromas and to better understand the nature of the neoplastic cell. METHODS: A Human XL Cytokine Discovery Magnetic Luminex 45-plex Fixed Panel Performance Assay was used to compare cytokine levels in cell culture supernatants of BIA-ALCL and other T-cell lymphomas, as well as malignant and benign seromas surrounding breast implants. Immunohistochemistry was employed to localize GrB to cells in seromas and capsular infiltrates. RESULTS: Differences in GrB concentrations between malignant and benign seromas were significant (P < 0.001). GrB was found in and around apoptotic tumor cells, suggesting that the protease may be involved in tumor cell death. CONCLUSIONS: GrB is a useful marker for early detection of malignant seromas and to identify tumor cells in seromas and capsular infiltrates. Because there is an overlap between the lowest concentrations of soluble GrB in malignant seromas and the highest concentrations of GrB in benign seromas, it is recommended that GrB be used only as part of a panel of biomarkers for the screening and early detection of BIA-ALCL.

Comparative Analysis of Cytokines of Tumor Cell Lines, Malignant and Benign Effusions Around Breast Implants.

BACKGROUND: More than 700 women have developed an anaplastic large T cell lymphoma (ALCL) surrounding textured surface breast implants, termed breast implant-associated ALCL (BIA-ALCL). Most patients with BIA-ALCL present with an accumulation of fluid (delayed seroma) around the implant. However, benign seromas without malignant cells complicating scar contracture, implant rupture, trauma, infection, and other causes are more common. For proper patient management and to avoid unnecessary surgery, a simple diagnostic test to identify malignant seromas is desirable. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to develop an ancillary test for the diagnosis of malignant seromas and to gain insight into the nature of the malignant cells and their microenvironment. METHODS: We employed an immunologic assay on only 50 µL of aspirated seroma fluid. The assay measures 13 cytokines simultaneously by flow cytometry. To establish a baseline for clinical studies we measured cytokines secreted by BIA-ALCL and cutaneous ALCL lines. RESULTS: Our study of cell line culture supernatants, and 8 malignant compared with 9 benign seromas indicates that interleukin 9 (IL-9), IL-10, IL-13, IL-22, and/or interferon γ concentrations >1000 pg/mL distinguish malignant seromas from benign seromas. IL-6, known to be a driver of malignant cells, is also elevated in benign seromas and does not distinguish them from malignant seromas. CONCLUSIONS: The cytokine assay introduced in this study can be used together with levels of soluble CD30 to identify malignant seromas. Validation of these findings in a larger prospective patient cohort is warranted. The unique pattern of cytokine expression in malignant effusions surrounding breast implants gives further insight into the pathogenesis and cells of origin of BIA-ALCL.Level of Evidence: 5.

A Step Forward Toward the Understanding of the Long-Term Pathogenesis of Double Capsule Formation in Macrotextured Implants: A Prospective Histological Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although increasingly reported in the literature, most plastic surgeons cannot define the etiology of double capsules. Often an incidental finding at implant exchange, double capsules are frequently associated with macrotextured devices. Several mechanisms have been proposed, including at the forefront that shearing causes a delamination of the periprosthetic capsule into a double capsule. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to confirm the hypothesis that mechanical forces are involved in formation of double capsules by histological analysis. METHODS: A prospective analysis of consecutive implants with double capsules removed over 2 years was performed. Data collected at the time of surgery included Baker classification, reason for explant, implant manufacturer and style, and any presence of a seroma associated with the capsule. Specimens were sent for analysis by histology utilizing hematoxylin and eosin and alpha-smooth muscle actin staining techniques. RESULTS: Eight double capsules were collected for specimen analysis. All capsules demonstrated evidence of granulation tissue, alpha-smooth muscle actin positive myofibroblasts, and folds with embedded texture. Fibrosis surrounded weak areas with presence of layering and splitting, creating a potential space that is prone to separation. Tears and folds from granulomatous reaction are also present within the outer layer of the double capsule, which can only be explained by a mechanical shearing force as a pathogenic mechanism. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the pathogenesis of double capsules may allow plastic surgeons to refine their indications for macrotextured implants while providing guidance to patients on avoidance of activities that produce shear-forces. The findings support the hypothesis that shearing forces delaminate the capsule into 2 separate distinct capsules.

The Use of Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate (P4HB) Scaffold in the Ptotic Breast: A Multicenter Clinical Study.

BACKGROUND: Mastopexy and reduction mammaplasty are often limited by the patient's poor native soft tissue quality, resulting in ptosis recurrence and loss of rejuvenated surgical results. Surgical scaffolds and acellular dermal matrices are used in these procedures to provide physical and mechanical stabilization of weakened or compromised tissue. GalaFLEX scaffold, made from poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB), is a next-generation product for soft tissue reinforcement that resorbs gradually while aiding tissue regeneration to achieve excellent outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical performance of GalaFLEX scaffold in soft tissue reinforcement during elective mastopexy and reduction mammaplasty. METHODS: This multicenter, single-arm, observational study assessed product performance and outcomes of GalaFLEX scaffold when used in breast surgery. Outcomes included ptosis correction and maintenance, associated adverse events, patient and surgeon satisfaction, and mammographic and ultrasound imaging evaluation. RESULTS: At 6 centers in the US, 62 of 69 enrolled patients were treated. Of this population, 89.7% had successful ptosis correction and maintenance at 1 year, with high patient and surgeon satisfaction for breast shape, droop/sag of the breast, and maintenance of results at 1 year. There were 5 adverse events deemed related to the device (8.0%), including nerve pain, breast swelling, ptosis, and 2 instances of asymmetry. CONCLUSIONS: GalaFLEX scaffold safely and successfully supports and elevates breast tissue in mastopexy and reduction mammaplasty, with maintained support at 1 year. Surgeon and patient satisfaction were high. No mammogram or ultrasound interference was detected.