Netscher D T, Weizer G, Malone R S, Walker L E, Thornby J, Patten B M
Division of Plastic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex., USA.
South Med J. 1996 Apr;89(4):397-404. doi: 10.1097/00007611-199604000-00009.
To determine sensitivity and specificity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography (US) in the detection of breast implant rupture, and also to determine the relative merits of clinical examination and mammography, we studied 81 patients (160 implants). All patients had implants removed, thus allowing confirmation of the presence or absence of rupture. Clinical examination positively identified only one patient with implant rupture, and mammography detected only two implant ruptures (both extracapsular). The sensitivity for US was 70% and specificity was 90%, while for MRI it was 75.6% and 94%, respectively. These differences between MRI and US were not statistically significant. Combining the results of US and MRI did not seem to add to the diagnostic discrimination. The most cost-effective method of diagnosing implant rupture was US in our study.
为了确定磁共振成像（MRI）和超声检查（US）在检测乳房植入物破裂方面的敏感性和特异性，并确定临床检查和乳房X线摄影的相对优点，我们对81例患者（160个植入物）进行了研究。所有患者均取出了植入物，从而能够确认是否存在破裂。临床检查仅阳性识别出1例植入物破裂患者，乳房X线摄影仅检测到2例植入物破裂（均为囊外破裂）。超声检查的敏感性为70%，特异性为90%，而MRI的敏感性和特异性分别为75.6%和94%。MRI和超声检查之间的这些差异无统计学意义。联合超声检查和MRI的结果似乎并未增加诊断鉴别力。在我们的研究中，诊断植入物破裂最具成本效益的方法是超声检查。
