Incidence of capsular contracture in silicone versus saline cosmetic augmentation mammoplasty: A meta-analysis.

作者: Yasser El-Sheikh , Roberto Tutino , Casey Knight , Farough Farrokhyar , Nicolas Hynes

DOI: 10.1177/229255030801600403

关键词:

摘要: Silicone implants for augmentation mammoplasty were first introduced in 1962 (1,2). Since then, they have undergone many changes terms of design and materials. There been at least five generations silicone to date, each using a different combination core material shell type (3). Each subsequent generation was an attempt improve their aesthetic quality feel, reduce complication rates. Cohesive gel 1993 represent the latest breast on market today (3). Despite improvements implant surgical technique, capsular contracture continues be significant problem. Reported rates clinically are between 15% 45% (2–5), with 92% these occurring year after surgery (6). A recent meta-analysis (6) found surface texturing protective against patients placed subglandular position. has no date looking effect contracture. In 1992, United States Food Drug Administration announced moratorium use implants, citing possible link rheumatic diseases cancer (1). evidence amassed discrediting claims (7–12) November 16, 2006, reapproved distribution Canada. Given that devices now more readily available surgeons, we performed determine: The (silicone versus saline) patients; and The reported who received cohesive implants. Our hypothesis, based clinical experience informal review literature, saline would contracture.

参考文章(25)
Per Hedén, Jan Jernbeck, Magnus Hober, Breast augmentation with anatomical cohesive gel implants: the world's largest current experience. Clinics in Plastic Surgery. ,vol. 28, pp. 531- 552 ,(2001) , 10.1016/S0094-1298(20)32393-2
Maurits W van Tulder, Willem JJ Assendelft, Bart W Koes, Lex M Bouter, Editorial Board of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group, None, Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration back review group for spinal disorders Spine. ,vol. 22, pp. 2323- 2330 ,(1997) , 10.1097/00007632-199710150-00001
Gregory P. Hetter, Satisfactions and dissatisfactions of patients with augmentation mammaplasty. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. ,vol. 64, pp. 151- 155 ,(1979) , 10.1097/00006534-197908000-00003
Donna F Stroup, Jesse A Berlin, Sally C Morton, Ingram Olkin, G David Williamson, Drummond Rennie, David Moher, Betsy J Becker, Theresa Ann Sipe, Stephen B Thacker, Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in EpidemiologyA Proposal for Reporting JAMA. ,vol. 283, pp. 2008- 2012 ,(2000) , 10.1001/JAMA.283.15.2008
Bruce Cunningham, The Mentor Core Study on Silicone MemoryGel Breast Implants. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. ,vol. 120, ,(2007) , 10.1097/01.PRS.0000286574.88752.04
Dennis M. Deapen, Garry S. Brody, Augmentation Mammaplasty and Breast Cancer: A 5-Year Update of the Los Angeles Study Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. ,vol. 89, pp. 660- 665 ,(1992) , 10.1097/00006534-199204000-00010
Michael J. Duffy, John E. Woods, Health risks of failed silicone gel breast implants: a 30-year clinical experience. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. ,vol. 94, pp. 295- 299 ,(1994) , 10.1097/00006534-199408000-00012
Laura L. Perkins, Brian D. Clark, Patti J. Klein, Ralph R. Cook, A meta-analysis of breast implants and connective tissue disease. Annals of Plastic Surgery. ,vol. 35, pp. 561- 570 ,(1995) , 10.1097/00000637-199512000-00001
Birgit H. Fruhstorfer, Elaine L.B. Hodgson, Charles M. Malata, Early Experience With an Anatomical Soft Cohesive Silicone Gel Prosthesis in Cosmetic and Reconstructive Breast Implant Surgery Annals of Plastic Surgery. ,vol. 53, pp. 536- 542 ,(2004) , 10.1097/01.SAP.0000134508.43550.6F
Gerald Little, James L. Baker, Results of Closed Compression Capsulotomy for Treatment of Contracted Breast Implant Capsules Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. ,vol. 65, pp. 30- 33 ,(1980) , 10.1097/00006534-198001000-00006