Bizarre implants for augmentation mammaplasty: Long term human reaction to polyethylene strips

Sˇmahel, Jirˇi; Schneider, K.-D.; Donski, P

doi:10.1016/0007-1226(77)90120-5

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Czerny (1895) described the first breast augmentation procedure when reported the transplantation of a giant lipoma to the breast (Czerny 1895, Spear et al 2009). There were numerous unsuccessful attempts of breast augmentation with both alloplastic and autologous tissue since then (Gersuny 1980, Thorek 1942, Harris 1961, Lalardrie and Mouly 1978, Rubin 1951, Edgerton and Mc 1958, Demergian 1963, Calnan 1970, Smahel et al 1977. Silicone implants were first introduced in 1963 by Cronin and Gerow (Cronin and Gerow 1963), starting the modern era of breast augmentation (Young and Watson 2001, Adams 2009a, Spear et al 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Capsular Contracture In Silicone Breast Implants: Insights From Rat Models

Vieira

d'Acâmpora

Neves

et al. 2016

An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast augmentation with silicone implants is one of the most common procedures performed by plastic surgeons around the world. Capsular contracture is a frequent complication in breast augmentation and reconstructive surgery, that requires invasive intervention. The inflammatory response to implanted mammary prostheses appears to be directly associated to capsular contracture. This review discusses the evidences from rat models studies, on the role of inflammation and fibrosis in capsular contraction and its relation to silicone breast implants surface.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Capsular Contracture In Silicone Breast Implants: Insights From Rat Models

Vieira

d'Acâmpora

Neves

et al. 2016

An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the English literature four cases were reported in three publications regarding the long term results of Polystan used for augmentation mammoplasty. [9][10][11] The type of implants in three cases was Polyethylene strips without casing. Two implants were 7 and 11 years old and were explanted for reasons of discomfort and aesthetic.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two implants were 7 and 11 years old and were explanted for reasons of discomfort and aesthetic. 9 Third patient with a 23 years old implant was published as a missed diagnosis of breast carcinoma. 10 Fourth case was mentioned in Peter's review as a different type of Polystan sponge that was shredded strips in a casing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Rare Case of Two Different Kinds of Long-Lasting Breast Implants in the Same Patient

Engin

2016

Turk J Plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sponge implants were used for aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery 60 years ago. Major capsular contracture and its uncontrolled clinical symptoms were seen in nearly all cases. With the development of silicone gel implants these sponges were no longer used. This case report presents a patient who had aesthetic breast augmentation with polyethylene (Polystan) sponge implants. One of the implants lasted for 40 years, and the other implant was rejected because of a localized infection seven years after surgery, which was replaced with a silicone gel implant that lasted for 34 years.

show abstract

“…Two cases were discussed by Smahel et al (1977) on the longterm reaction to Polyethylene strips implanted for breast augmentation. In each case, the fibrin-covered strips were closely packed and were 1.5 to 2 mm wide, up to 1 mm long and 0.07 mm thick.…”

Section: Case Reportsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the surgery, her breasts had been hard and deformed. On histological examination Polyethylene strips were surrounded by dense collagenous tissue and sporadic macrophages and giant cells, indicating a prolonged interaction (Smahel et al 1977). Roberts and Taylor (1990) reported a case of adenocarcinoma of the breast associated with Polyethylene strips used for augmentation.…”

Section: Case Reportsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Polyethylene1

2007

Int J Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polyethylene is an ethylene polymer used for a variety of purposes in cosmetics as an abrasive, adhesive, binder or bulking agent, an emulsion stabilizer, a film former, an oral care agent, and as a nonaqueous viscosity-increasing agent. Polyethylene is also used in food packaging materials and medical products, including prosthetics. The molecular weight of Polyethylene as used in cosmetics varies over a wide range. The lowest reported molecular weight is 198 Daltons and the highest is 150,000. In any given polymer preparation, there can be a broad range of molecular weights. Cellular and tissue responses to Polyethylene, determined as part of implant biocompatibility testing, include fibrous connective tissue build-up around the implant material that varies as a function of the physical form of the implant material. Specific assays for osteoblast proliferation and collagen synthesis demonstrated a reduction as a function of exposure to Polyethylene particles that is inversely related to particle size. The effect of Polyurethane particles on monocyte-derived macrophages, however, had a stimulatory effect, prolonging the survival of these cells in culture. The LD50 for Polyethylene, with an average molecular weight of 450, in rats was > 2000 mg/kg. For Polyethylene with an average molecular weight of 655, the LD50 was > 5.0 g/kg. Toxicity testing in rats shows no adverse effects at Polyethylene (molecular weight not given) doses of 7.95 g/kg or at 1.25%, 2.50%, or 5.00% in feed for 90 days. Dermal irritation studies on rabbits in which 0.5 g of Polyethylene (average molecular weight of 450) was administered in 0.5 ml of water caused no irritation or corrosive effects; Polyethylene with an average molecular weight of 655 was a mild irritant. Polyethylene (average molecular weight of 450) did not cause dermal sensitization in guinea pigs tested with 50% Polyethylene (w/w) in arachis oil BP. Polyethylene, with a molecular weight of 450 and a molecular weight of 655, was a mild irritant when tested as a solid material in the eyes of rabbits. Rabbit eyes treated with a solution containing 13% Polyethylene beads produced minimal irritation and no corneal abrasions. No genotoxicity was found in bacterial assays. No chemical carcinogenicity has been seen in implantation studies, although particles from Polyethylene implants can induce so-called solid-state carcinogenicity, which is a physical reaction to an implanted material. Occupational case reports of ocular irritation and systemic sclerosis in workers exposed to Polyethylene have been difficult to interpret because such workers are also exposed to other irritants. Clinical testing of intrauterine devices made of Polyethylene failed to conclusively identify statistically significant adverse effects, although squamous metaplasia was observed. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel did not expect significant dermal absorption and systemic exposure to large Polyethylene polymers used in cosmetics. The Panel was concerned that information on impurities, includ...

show abstract

Bizarre implants for augmentation mammaplasty: Long term human reaction to polyethylene strips

Cited by 9 publications

References 2 publications

Capsular Contracture In Silicone Breast Implants: Insights From Rat Models

Capsular Contracture In Silicone Breast Implants: Insights From Rat Models

A Rare Case of Two Different Kinds of Long-Lasting Breast Implants in the Same Patient

Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Polyethylene1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About