Advertisement

The Breast Implant Risk

Breast implants leaking contaminated silicone are causing a fuss in Europe, but all breast implants carry risks.

By | January 26, 2012

image: The Breast Implant Risk FDA, Wikimedia Commons

FDA, WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

The current breast implant scandal in Europe has nothing to do with celebrity news. On December 23, the French Agency for the Safety of Health Products recommended that more than 30,000 French women with silicone-filled breast implants made by the medical device company Poly Implant Prothese have them removed because more than 10 percent ruptured within a year of surgery, releasing the implants’ contents into the body.

To make matters worse, these particular implants are filled with industrial-grade silicone, instead of medical-grade, which could contain unregulated and dangerous chemicals.

“They used industrial grade silicone; I cannot believe this,” said polymer chemist Judit Puskas from the University of Akron, who is developing new implant materials. “You have all kinds of additives in there that are carcinogenic.”

Breast implants are composed of a silicone sac that contains silicone or saline gel, and the silicone sacs of the PIP implants are weaker than normal, leading to rupture. In this case, the implants were filled with silicone that has not passed regulatory approval and was intended to waterproof bricks: not exactly a material doctors want circulating in women’s bodies.

After an implant ruptures, the silicone filling slowly seeps into the body’s tissues, bloodstream, and lymphatic system. The French health agency has confirmed that the leaked silicone from PIP implants causes generalized pain and irritation, and that the material can be identified in lymph nodes with an ultrasound. Fortunately, preliminary animal studies showed no evidence of higher DNA mutation rates as a result of rupture.

But all breast implants come with risks: within 10 years, up to 30 percent of patients have their implants removed or replaced, according to the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) 2011 silicone breast implant report. Part of the reason is just standard wear and tear, said Malcolm Roth, American Society of Plastic Surgeons president and chief of plastic surgery at Albany Medical Center.  “Patients shouldn’t think of these as lifelong devices.”

Silicone gel-filled implants.
Silicone gel-filled implants.
FDA, WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Most of the time, rupture simply results in the slow leakage of harmless silicone or saline. “If it’s medical grade silicone that’s been scrutinized by the FDA, and the company is doing what it’s supposed to do, it does not appear to be a health risk,” said Roth. “It sounds horrible, but you might never even know that there’s a leak.” Occasionally, however, women can experience pain and irritation following rupture, and require surgical removal of the implants. Others, if they are aware of the rupture, simply opt for surgery to rid their body of the deflated silicone sac.

Another concern is capsular contracture, which occurs when the body recognizes the implant as a foreign body and constructs a collagen shell around it. Sometimes these collagen shells remain pliable and go unnoticed, but in up to 20 percent of women with implants, they can harden and squeeze the implant, causing discomfort, disfiguration, and rupture.

“It’s essentially like a thickened sort of scar that forms around the implant that subsequently causes pain, distortion of the shape of the breast, to the point where the implant actually moves,” said Anand Deva, head of plastic surgery at Liverpool Hospital in Australia. “What was before a soft and palpable implant becomes like a hard rock.”

Additionally, the FDA released a report last year suggesting that breast implants cause a small increased risk of a rare cancer called anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), although researchers don’t know why. “The risk of contracting lymphoma in the breast in the normal population is one in a million, and that risk goes up minutely with an implant—but still goes up,” said Deva. Indeed, there have been eight cases of the disease reported in women with the PIP implants, but there’s no indication that rate is higher than seen in other types of implants. “It’s a rare cancer that occurs perhaps slightly more frequently with certain types of implants,” Deva said, “but it’s a bit sensationalist.”

Researchers not happy with the current 30 percent failure rate of implants are working to find something better. Puskas has developed a non-silicone-based polymer that she hopes will result in fewer adverse reactions and fewer reoperations. “I don’t know any other medical devices that are approved with this high of a failure rate,” she said.

And the San Diego, California-based biotech company Cytori is seeding women’s breasts with fat and stem cells to try and regrow breasts after a mastectomy. To do this, they harvest a patient’s abdominal fat using liposuction, and inject the fat cells and stem cells found in fat into the breast. The stem cells don’t turn into breast tissue; rather, the fat cells fill up the space leftover from a mastectomy and the stem cells generate blood vessels to sustain the new tissue. The company released safety data from a 71-person trial of former breast cancer patients last March, but they have no other active trials registered with the US National Institutes of Health.

Advertisement

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You

You

Processing...
Processing...

Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo

Comments

Avatar of: drkolb

drkolb

Posts: 1

January 26, 2012

For more information on the dangers of breast implants see the information at www.thenakedtruthaboutbreastim....  Also, the risk of lymphoma in women with shells made from the lost salt technique (either silicone or saline filled) may be more that what is reported in the literature.  My practice probably took care of the largest number of women sick from implants in the United States and the most common cause of death was an aggressive lymphoma and these cases were not reported in the literature.  About six years ago I began to remove abnormal axillary lymph nodes and since then have not heard of any deaths from lymphoma.  The current literature states that these cases are from one style of breast implant which is the textured shell made with the lost salt technique.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 26, 2012

For more information on the dangers of breast implants see the information at www.thenakedtruthaboutbreastim....  Also, the risk of lymphoma in women with shells made from the lost salt technique (either silicone or saline filled) may be more that what is reported in the literature.  My practice probably took care of the largest number of women sick from implants in the United States and the most common cause of death was an aggressive lymphoma and these cases were not reported in the literature.  About six years ago I began to remove abnormal axillary lymph nodes and since then have not heard of any deaths from lymphoma.  The current literature states that these cases are from one style of breast implant which is the textured shell made with the lost salt technique.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 26, 2012

For more information on the dangers of breast implants see the information at www.thenakedtruthaboutbreastim....  Also, the risk of lymphoma in women with shells made from the lost salt technique (either silicone or saline filled) may be more that what is reported in the literature.  My practice probably took care of the largest number of women sick from implants in the United States and the most common cause of death was an aggressive lymphoma and these cases were not reported in the literature.  About six years ago I began to remove abnormal axillary lymph nodes and since then have not heard of any deaths from lymphoma.  The current literature states that these cases are from one style of breast implant which is the textured shell made with the lost salt technique.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 27, 2012

From the International Coalition For Drug Awareness (www.drugawareness.org),
11/05/2003 alert, first discussing and then quoting from an Associated Press
report:

Dr. Thomas Whalen, Chairman of FDA’s advisory committee that had voted on Nov 3 to approve with restrictions the resumption of silicone breast implants, wrote a letter to FDA Commissioner, Marc McLellan, urging him to ignore the committee’s vote and not approve.

Dr. Whalen said he took the unusual step because “I felt morally compelled.â€쳌
Let us hope that more physicians will begin to feel morally compelled to do no
harm.
                         _______________________

WASHINGTON (AP) —In a highly unusual move, the chairman of a government advisory panel that reluctantly backed resuming sales of silicone gel breast implants now is urging federal health officials and lawmakers to disregard that advice.

“I really have a lot of angstâ€쳌 about the panel’s vote, said Dr. Thomas Whalen of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. “I felt morally compelled — it sounds corny, but morally compelled — to do something about it.â€쳌
                              *************
As the panel’s chairman, Whalen could not vote unless there was a tie. But in a letter obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, he wrote FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan and five members of Congress about his “very strong reservations concerning this vote.â€쳌

“Long-term safety, the concern that prompted the removal from the market 11 years ago, was clearly not demonstrated,â€쳌 Whalen wrote.

Also “extraordinarily troubling,â€쳌 he added, is the enormous costs that women face for additional surgeries and removal of broken or painful implants. “This is a public health issue of no small import that must be addressed should the FDA second this misguided panel decision,â€쳌 Whalen said.

It is unfortunate that so much of policy decisions and even scientific framing of issues is divorced from ethics and objectivity, so much so that a conscientious Doctor in a high level policy-making panel has to anticipatorily appeal to others' sympathy -a door to higher values- by referring to his ethical behaviour as "corny."

This happens in a culture where ethical action is not highly rewarded, or, as importantly highly trained. When dollars rewards motivate decisions this is the culture that is created. The FDA is notorious for this.

This poorly considered decision was back in 2003 and the effects continue.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 27, 2012

From the International Coalition For Drug Awareness (www.drugawareness.org),
11/05/2003 alert, first discussing and then quoting from an Associated Press
report:

Dr. Thomas Whalen, Chairman of FDA’s advisory committee that had voted on Nov 3 to approve with restrictions the resumption of silicone breast implants, wrote a letter to FDA Commissioner, Marc McLellan, urging him to ignore the committee’s vote and not approve.

Dr. Whalen said he took the unusual step because “I felt morally compelled.â€쳌
Let us hope that more physicians will begin to feel morally compelled to do no
harm.
                         _______________________

WASHINGTON (AP) —In a highly unusual move, the chairman of a government advisory panel that reluctantly backed resuming sales of silicone gel breast implants now is urging federal health officials and lawmakers to disregard that advice.

“I really have a lot of angstâ€쳌 about the panel’s vote, said Dr. Thomas Whalen of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. “I felt morally compelled — it sounds corny, but morally compelled — to do something about it.â€쳌
                              *************
As the panel’s chairman, Whalen could not vote unless there was a tie. But in a letter obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, he wrote FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan and five members of Congress about his “very strong reservations concerning this vote.â€쳌

“Long-term safety, the concern that prompted the removal from the market 11 years ago, was clearly not demonstrated,â€쳌 Whalen wrote.

Also “extraordinarily troubling,â€쳌 he added, is the enormous costs that women face for additional surgeries and removal of broken or painful implants. “This is a public health issue of no small import that must be addressed should the FDA second this misguided panel decision,â€쳌 Whalen said.

It is unfortunate that so much of policy decisions and even scientific framing of issues is divorced from ethics and objectivity, so much so that a conscientious Doctor in a high level policy-making panel has to anticipatorily appeal to others' sympathy -a door to higher values- by referring to his ethical behaviour as "corny."

This happens in a culture where ethical action is not highly rewarded, or, as importantly highly trained. When dollars rewards motivate decisions this is the culture that is created. The FDA is notorious for this.

This poorly considered decision was back in 2003 and the effects continue.

Avatar of: ssum

ssum

Posts: 28

January 27, 2012

From the International Coalition For Drug Awareness (www.drugawareness.org),
11/05/2003 alert, first discussing and then quoting from an Associated Press
report:

Dr. Thomas Whalen, Chairman of FDA’s advisory committee that had voted on Nov 3 to approve with restrictions the resumption of silicone breast implants, wrote a letter to FDA Commissioner, Marc McLellan, urging him to ignore the committee’s vote and not approve.

Dr. Whalen said he took the unusual step because “I felt morally compelled.â€쳌
Let us hope that more physicians will begin to feel morally compelled to do no
harm.
                         _______________________

WASHINGTON (AP) —In a highly unusual move, the chairman of a government advisory panel that reluctantly backed resuming sales of silicone gel breast implants now is urging federal health officials and lawmakers to disregard that advice.

“I really have a lot of angstâ€쳌 about the panel’s vote, said Dr. Thomas Whalen of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. “I felt morally compelled — it sounds corny, but morally compelled — to do something about it.â€쳌
                              *************
As the panel’s chairman, Whalen could not vote unless there was a tie. But in a letter obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, he wrote FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan and five members of Congress about his “very strong reservations concerning this vote.â€쳌

“Long-term safety, the concern that prompted the removal from the market 11 years ago, was clearly not demonstrated,â€쳌 Whalen wrote.

Also “extraordinarily troubling,â€쳌 he added, is the enormous costs that women face for additional surgeries and removal of broken or painful implants. “This is a public health issue of no small import that must be addressed should the FDA second this misguided panel decision,â€쳌 Whalen said.

It is unfortunate that so much of policy decisions and even scientific framing of issues is divorced from ethics and objectivity, so much so that a conscientious Doctor in a high level policy-making panel has to anticipatorily appeal to others' sympathy -a door to higher values- by referring to his ethical behaviour as "corny."

This happens in a culture where ethical action is not highly rewarded, or, as importantly highly trained. When dollars rewards motivate decisions this is the culture that is created. The FDA is notorious for this.

This poorly considered decision was back in 2003 and the effects continue.

Follow The Scientist

icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-twitter icon-vimeo icon-youtube
Advertisement

Stay Connected with The Scientist

  • icon-facebook The Scientist Magazine
  • icon-facebook The Scientist Careers
  • icon-facebook Neuroscience Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Genetic Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Cell Culture Techniques
  • icon-facebook Microbiology and Immunology
  • icon-facebook Cancer Research and Technology
  • icon-facebook Stem Cell and Regenerative Science
Advertisement
Advertisement
The Scientist
The Scientist