Mammography and breast implants

Recent recommendations by the American Cancer Society have focused attention on the value of screening mammography in the detection of occult breast cancers. This has resulted in a proliferation of "walk in" and mobile mammography screening clinics and a barrage of publicity aimed at women aged 40 and over. Among these are more than a half million women who have had an augmentation mammaplasty; at least another half million are still under 40 but entering this age group incrementally. Opinion is divided as to the value of this procedure because of uncertainty as to the amount of breast tissue obscured by the implant. Calibrated planimetry was used to measure the area of the implant and the glandular portion of the breasts in six sets of mammograms. Utilizing solid geometric calculations, it was found that the percentage of glandular tissue obscured by the implant varied from 22 to 83 percent. This wide variation casts serious doubt on the reliability of routine film screen mammography in these patients.     

Biocompatibility of radiolucent breast implants

Current implants for breast augmentation containing silicone gel, saline, or both are radiopaque on mammographic examination and can totally obscure microcalcifications and soft-tissue masses. The effect of these implants on the detection of early breast cancers in patients who have undergone augmentation mammaplasty remains unproven and controversial. Implants filled with medium-chain triglycerides (peanut oil) are radiolucent on mammographic examination and allow visualization of both soft-tissue masses and microcalcifications. To investigate the biocompatibility of radiolucent implants, 10 cc of sterile, nonpyrogenic peanut oil was injected subcutaneously into rats using silicone gel as a control. Twenty-one rabbits had two 125-cc silicone shell implants inserted on either side of the chest wall. The right-sided shell was filled with 125 cc of sterile saline, and the left-sided shell was filled with 125 cc of sterile, nonpyrogenic peanut oil. Results were determined by both histologic and radiographic examination. Rats injected with peanut oil equivalent to 7 percent of their body weight rapidly absorbed the freely injected oil without detriment. Histologic examination of the lungs, liver, kidneys, and tissues adjacent to the injection sites demonstrated no abnormalities. There was no evidence of allergic, toxic, inflammatory, or neoplastic response. Eighteen of 21 rabbits survived more than 3 months. Radiographs showed the oil-filled implants to be radiolucent, whereas the saline-filled controls obscured the surrounding soft and bony tissues. Histologic examination demonstrated a fibrous capsule surrounding both types of implants. Histologic examination of the lungs, liver, and kidneys showed no significant abnormalities. These and previous studies have shown peanut oil to be biocompatible when freely injected either intramuscularly or subcutaneously. This study demonstrates that a radiolucent, peanut oil-filled implant is biocompatible in animals and that further long-term studies for its use in humans are merited.     

Calcification properties of saline-filled breast implants

Three patients requested explantation of their saline-filled breast implants. Bilateral calcification had occurred in all six implants. Four of the implants were manufactured by McGhan Corporation (Santa Barbara, Calif.), and two, by the Simaplast Company (Toulon, France). All implants had been inserted in the subglandular plane and had been in place for 7 to 23 years. At the time of explantation, patients were 32, 34, and 44 years old. Calcification on the surface of the implants and capsules was analyzed. Implant surface calcification was clinically evident on all six implants, appearing as ivory-colored, tenaciously adherent deposits, only on the anterior surface of the implant. Capsular calcification, which was observed only microscopically, was characterized by poorly organized, irregularly shaped, calcified agglomerates; this calcification also occurred only on the anterior surface of the capsule, adjacent to the area of calcification on the implant. Ultrastructural analysis of scrapings from the implant surface showed large, electron-dense aggregates of crystals, with individual crystals measuring approximately 40 x 10 x 10 nm. In contrast, capsular calcification was characterized by two patterns of deposition, spherulitic aggregates of needle-shaped crystals and areas of metaplastic bone. The individual crystals were approximately 40 x 10 x 10 nm. Energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy of specimens from the areas of calcification on the implant and capsule surfaces demonstrated calcium and phosphorus. Electron diffraction of crystals from the implant and capsule surfaces demonstrated the D-spacings characteristic of calcium apatite. There were many differences between the calcification properties of these six saline implants and those of silicone gel implants. For example, mineralization has not been observed on the surface of gel implants, but in these saline implants it occurred primarily on the implant surface. Also, capsular calcification has been observed clinically in gel implants across the surface of the capsule (except at the site of attachment of a Dacron patch), but in this study it was observed only microscopically and was located on the anterior surface of the capsule, adjacent to the area of calcification on the implant. In addition, crystals 100 times larger than those observed on the six saline implant capsules have been observed on the surface of gel implant capsules. A model is presented to explain the mechanism of calcification associated with breast implants and to explain the observed differences between saline-filled and gel-filled implants.