Search

Introduction: Breast implants follow-up with any type of examination is often neglected; this may cause an error or delay in the diagnosis of complications prosthesis-related such as BIA-ALCL. This study aims to better understand adequate follow-up criteria., Method: All female patients undergoing aesthetic breast augmentation and breast MRI in its follow-up conducted from April 2006 to December 2019 were included in this study. The variables analyzed were age, breast implant surgery date, time with the implant, reason for the examination, and the final examination report. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to search for the predictors of positive findings in MRI. A Cox Regression analysis and cumulative risk curves, controlled by age, was performed to investigate the relationship between time with implants and the risk of positive findings in MRI., Results: The patients submitted to MRI had complaints in 29.6% of cases, with pain being the most common, 13.9% of cases. In logistic regression analysis, time with the implant was associated with a higher risk of positive findings in univariate analysis (OR = 1.07, p = 0.036), but not in multivariate analysis. Both pain and breast form changes were independent predictors for positive findings in MRI, OR = 2.79, p = 0.04, and OR = 16.98, p < 0.001, respectively. The cumulative risk of positive findings in MRI increased considerably only after 10 years of implantation., Conclusions: Time with breast implants may be associated with a higher risk of changes in breast MRI examinations, although this relationship was not significant in multivariate logistic regression analysis. The cumulative risk for positive findings seems to increase considerably only after 10 years of implantation. This study draws attention to the paramount importance of follow-up with a clinical breast examination. Despite time with implants or patients' age, both pain and breast form changes were the most important predictors for MRI alterations., Level of Evidence Iv: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Purpose: We aimed to study the relationship between two morphological parameters recently described on MRI images in relation to lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS): the first is the sedimentation sign (SedS) and the second is the morphological grading of lumbar stenosis., Materials and Methods: MRIs from a total of 137 patients were studied. From those, 110 were issued from a prospective database of symptomatic LSS patients, of whom 73 were treated surgically and 37 conservatively based on symptom severity. A third group consisting of 27 subjects complaining of low back pain (LBP) served as control. Severity of stenosis was judged at disc level using the four A to D grade morphological classification. The presence of a SedS was judged at pedicle level, above or below the site of maximal stenosis., Results: A positive SedS was observed in 58, 69 and 76% of patients demonstrating B, C and D morphology, respectively, but in none with grade A morphology. The SedS was positive in 67 and 35% of the surgically and conservatively treated patients, respectively, and in 8% of the LBP group. C and D morphological grades were present in 97 and 35% of patients in the surgically and conservatively treated group, respectively, and in 18% of the LBP group. Presence of a positive SedS carried an increased risk of being submitted to surgery in the symptomatic LSS group (OR 3.5). This risk was even higher in the LSS patients demonstrating grade C or D morphology (OR 65)., Discussion and Conclusion: One-third of surgically treated LSS patients do not present a SedS. This sign appears to be a lesser predictor of treatment modality in our setting of symptomatic LSS patients compared to the severity of stenosis judged by the morphological grade.