TY - JOUR
T1 - Prevalence of Local Postoperative Complications and Breast Implant Illness in Women With Breast Implants
AU - Lieffering, Annemiek S
AU - Hommes, Juliëtte E
AU - Ramerman, Lotte
AU - Rakhorst, Hinne A
AU - Mureau, Marc A M
AU - Verheij, Robert A
AU - van der Hulst, René R W J
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding/Support: This study was supported in part by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport and the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/10/7
Y1 - 2022/10/7
N2 - Importance: It is unknown how often breast implant illness (BII) is the indication for revision in women with silicone breast implants.Objective: To examine how often women with silicone breast implants have their implants explanted or replaced because of BII compared with local postoperative complications.Design, Setting, and Participants: A legacy cohort study on breast implant revision surgery was conducted between April 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, and a prospective cohort study on breast implantation and revision surgery was conducted between April 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019 (with follow-up until December 31, 2020). Data were obtained from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry. Data analysis was performed from September 2021 to August 2022.Exposures: Silicone breast implant.Main Outcomes and Measures: Breast implant revision with the indication BII or local postoperative complications.Results: All 12 882 cosmetic breast implants (6667 women; mean [SD] age, 50.6 [12.7] years) and 2945 reconstructive breast implants (2139 women, mean [SD] age, 57.9 [11.3] years) in the legacy cohort and all 47 564 cosmetic breast implants (24 120 women, mean [SD] age, 32.3 [9.7] years) and 5928 reconstructive breast implants (4688 women, mean [SD] age, 50.9 [11.5] years) in the prospective cohort were included for analysis. In the prospective cohort, 739 cosmetic breast implants (1.6%) were revised after a median (IQR) time to reoperation of 1.8 (0.9-3.1) years, and 697 reconstructive breast implants (11.8%) were revised after a median (IQR) time to reoperation of 1.1 (0.5-1.9) years. BII was registered as the reason for revision in 35 cosmetic revisions (4.7%) and 5 reconstructive revisions (0.7%) in the prospective cohort, corresponding to 0.1% of the inserted implants. In the legacy cohort, 536 cosmetic revisions (4.2%) and 80 reconstructive breast implant revisions (2.7%) were performed because of BII.Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of women with silicone breast implants, BII was an uncommon indication for revision compared with local complications, both in the short and long term. In contrast to the increasing public interest in BII, these results showed that local complications are a far more common reason for breast implant revision.
AB - Importance: It is unknown how often breast implant illness (BII) is the indication for revision in women with silicone breast implants.Objective: To examine how often women with silicone breast implants have their implants explanted or replaced because of BII compared with local postoperative complications.Design, Setting, and Participants: A legacy cohort study on breast implant revision surgery was conducted between April 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, and a prospective cohort study on breast implantation and revision surgery was conducted between April 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019 (with follow-up until December 31, 2020). Data were obtained from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry. Data analysis was performed from September 2021 to August 2022.Exposures: Silicone breast implant.Main Outcomes and Measures: Breast implant revision with the indication BII or local postoperative complications.Results: All 12 882 cosmetic breast implants (6667 women; mean [SD] age, 50.6 [12.7] years) and 2945 reconstructive breast implants (2139 women, mean [SD] age, 57.9 [11.3] years) in the legacy cohort and all 47 564 cosmetic breast implants (24 120 women, mean [SD] age, 32.3 [9.7] years) and 5928 reconstructive breast implants (4688 women, mean [SD] age, 50.9 [11.5] years) in the prospective cohort were included for analysis. In the prospective cohort, 739 cosmetic breast implants (1.6%) were revised after a median (IQR) time to reoperation of 1.8 (0.9-3.1) years, and 697 reconstructive breast implants (11.8%) were revised after a median (IQR) time to reoperation of 1.1 (0.5-1.9) years. BII was registered as the reason for revision in 35 cosmetic revisions (4.7%) and 5 reconstructive revisions (0.7%) in the prospective cohort, corresponding to 0.1% of the inserted implants. In the legacy cohort, 536 cosmetic revisions (4.2%) and 80 reconstructive breast implant revisions (2.7%) were performed because of BII.Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of women with silicone breast implants, BII was an uncommon indication for revision compared with local complications, both in the short and long term. In contrast to the increasing public interest in BII, these results showed that local complications are a far more common reason for breast implant revision.
KW - Adult
KW - Breast Implantation/adverse effects
KW - Breast Implants/adverse effects
KW - Cohort Studies
KW - Female
KW - Humans
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Postoperative Complications/epidemiology
KW - Prevalence
KW - Prospective Studies
KW - Silicone Gels
U2 - 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.36519
DO - 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.36519
M3 - Article
C2 - 36205992
SN - 2574-3805
VL - 5
JO - Jama network open
JF - Jama network open
IS - 10
M1 - e2236519
ER -