Medical Specialist Care Utilization Prior to the Explantation of Cosmetic Silicone Breast Implants: A Nationwide Retrospective Data Linkage Study.

BACKGROUND: Explantation is the proposed treatment for breast implant illness (BII). Little is known about which medical specialists are visited and what diagnoses are made before explantation is provided as the treatment. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated medical specialist care utilization in women with cosmetic breast implants who underwent explantation compared to women who chose breast implant replacement surgery and to women without breast implants. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using data linkage with the Dutch Breast Implant Registry and the Dutch health insurance claims database. Visits to medical specialists were examined over the 3 years before explantation. A total of 832 explantation patients were matched and compared to 1463 breast implant replacement patients and 1664 women without breast implants. RESULTS: Explantation patients were more likely to have visited > 5 different medical specialties compared to both replacement patients (12.3% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001) and women without breast implants (12.3% vs. 3.7%; p < 0.001). Among explantation patients, women who underwent explantation because of BII were more likely to have visited > 5 different medical specialties compared to women who underwent explantation because of other reasons (25.0% vs. 11.0%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Women who underwent explantation of breast implants had higher utilization of medical specialist care in the years before explantation compared to women who underwent breast implant replacement surgery and women without breast implants. Medical specialist care use was especially high among women for whom BII was the registered reason for explantation. These findings suggest further research is needed into the link between BII and the use of medical specialist care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Imaging findings after a total reconstructed breast with autologous fat transfer: what the radiologist needs to know.

Autologous fat transfer (AFT) is an upcoming technique for total breast reconstruction. Consequently, radiological imaging of women with an AFT reconstructed breast will increase in the coming years, yet radiological experience and evidence after AFT is limited.The surgical procedure of AFT and follow-up with imaging modalities including mammography (MG), ultrasound (US), and MRI in patients with a total breast reconstruction with AFT are summarized to illustrate the radiological normal and suspicious findings for malignancy.Imaging after a total breast reconstruction with AFT appears to be based mostly on benign imaging findings with an overall low biopsy rate. As higher volumes are injected in this technique, the risk for the onset of fat necrosis increases. Imaging findings most often are related to fat necrosis after AFT. On MG, fat necrosis can mostly be seen as oil cysts. The occurrence of a breast seroma after total breast reconstruction with AFT is an unfavourable outcome and may require special treatment. Fat deposition in the pectoral muscle is a previously unknown, but benign entity. Although fat necrosis is a benign entity, it can mimic breast cancer (recurrence).In symptomatic women after total breast reconstruction with AFT, MG and US can be considered as first diagnostic modalities. Breast MRI can be used as a problem-solving tool during later stage. Future studies should investigate the most optimal follow-up strategy, including different imaging modalities, in patients treated with AFT for total breast reconstruction.

Registration of finger implants in the Dutch arthroplasty registry (LROI).

Finger arthroplasty is commonly used to treat pain in the finger joints due to osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. Despite the procedure having existed for a relatively long time, it is still unknown which characteristics influence implant survival. The Dutch Arthroplasty Registry (LROI) is one of the 4 registries worldwide registering finger arthroplasties. This study aimed to investigate impact factors for implant survival regarding finger joint arthroplasty and assess registration completeness using the national healthcare claims database to compare. A total of 951 primary arthroplasties and 84 revision arthroplasties of the finger joints were registered. A higher likelihood of primary and revision surgery was found in female patients. The third and fourth proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints were the most frequently operated in primary surgery; however, the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints were the most frequently revised joints. Silicone implants were used in most cases and evenly throughout all digits. Suboptimal registration completeness was shown for plastic surgeons with just 35.5%-37.4% of all surgeries registered. Although orthopedic surgeons do not perform most surgeries on the hand, they registered 76.5%-78.2% of surgeries. No statistical analyses were justified, considering the low completeness and limited follow-up. Female gender and PIP joint disease are possible risk factors for primary arthroplasty. MCP arthroplasties showed higher revision rates. However, participation rates and, therefore, data completeness were not optimal. To optimize participation, improving ease of registration should be explored. Furthermore, we urge readers who deal with joint implants to register their surgeries in the LROI database because only optimal registration completeness leads to high-quality data.