Surgeon-Performed Ultrasound for Detection of Breast Implant Rupture: A Structured Literature Review
Keywords:
Surgeon-performed ultrasound, Silicone breast implants, Implant rupture, High-resolution ultrasound, Diagnostic accuracy, Breast implant surveillanceAbstract
Introduction: Silicone implant breast augmentation has become a common procedure, yet breast implant rupture continues to pose serious problems. The standard diagnostic method of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) faces obstacles because of its expensive nature, the discomfort it causes patients, and its restricted availability. The study investigates surgeon-performed ultrasound SPUS as a diagnostic alternative that detects silicone implant rupture.
Materials and Methods: This structured review examined literature from multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, to study the diagnostic accuracy, clinical usefulness, and effectiveness of SPUS. The quality of included studies was determined through the QUADAS-2 tool, where the risk of bias was assessed in patient selection, index test, reference standard, flow, and time.
Results: The review demonstrates that SPUS achieves diagnostic precision that can be comparable to MRI results when detecting both intracapsular and extracapsular ruptures while also detecting silicone migration into axillary lymph nodes. The diagnostic process of SPUS depends on the skills of the operator because better diagnostic results come from additional training, which makes structured educational programmes necessary.
Discussion: The SPUS system enables assessment of implant positions together with detection of complications such as rotation, which physical examination alone usually overlooks.
Conclusion: The study proves that SPUS provides a practical, affordable, and precise solution that can be a suitable alternative for MRI for breast implant monitoring. The system requires training before medical personnel can use it as a standard method, which helps doctors to diagnose patients quickly in areas that have limited resources.
References
1. Rochira D, Cavalcanti P, Ottaviani A, Tambasco D. Longitudinal ultrasound study of breast implant rupture over a six-year interval. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(2):150-154. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000000539
2. Kim JH, Kim YG, Song KY, et al. Exploration of point-of-care ultrasonography for silicone breast implant rupture detection and classification. Medicina (Kaunas). 2024;60(2):306. doi:10.3390/medicina60020306
3. Oni G, Chow W, Ramakrishnan V, Griffiths M. Plastic surgeon–led ultrasound. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(2):300e-309e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000004071
4. Glener AD, Sergesketter AR, Adams WP. Outcomes of in-office, high resolution ultrasound silicone breast implant surveillance by plastic surgeons. Aesthet Surg J. 2024;45(1):48-55. doi:10.1093/asj/sjae165
5. Ferenz S, McGuire P, Glicksman C. The efficacy and associated learning curve of office-based high-resolution ultrasound to detect shell failure in breast implants. Aesthet Surg J. 2022;43(6):657-661. doi:10.1093/asj/sjac330
6. Firmani G, Rosato L, Giannini G, Navach V. Extracapsular breast implant rupture with silicone migration and lymphadenopathy following a breast augmentation – a case report. Case Rep Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2025;12(1). doi:10.1080/23320885.2025.2497265
7. Hillard C, Fowler JD, Barta R, Cunningham B. Silicone breast implant rupture: a review. Gland Surg. 2017;6(2):163-168. doi:10.21037/gs.2016.09.12
8. Lake E, Ahmad S, Dobrashian R. The sonographic appearances of breast implant rupture. Clin Radiol. 2013;68(8):851-858. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2013.03.014
9. Lourenco AP, Moy L, Baron P, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria breast implant evaluation. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(5):S13-S25. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2018.03.009
10. Spit KA, Azahaf S, C JM, et al. Ultrasound versus MRI for evaluation of silicone leakage from silicone breast implants. Heliyon. 2024;10(12):e33325. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33325
11. Salzman MJ. Silent rupture of silicone gel breast implants: high-resolution ultrasound scans and surveys of 584 women. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;149(1):7-14. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000008632
12. Jaeger M, Randquist C, Gahm J. Anatomical breast implant assessment using ultrasound: a case series from the International Breast Implant Check Clinic. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2023;11(12):e5469. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000005469
13. Benito-Ruiz J, de Cabo F. Ultrasonography: a useful tool for plastic surgeons. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2014;38(3):561-569. doi:10.1007/s00266-014-0300-z
14. Swanson E. Risk of breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(10):1434. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2616
15. Carr LW, Jones A, Schilling A, Mackay DR, Potochny JD, Roberts J. A prospective approach to inform and treat 1340 patients at risk for BIA-ALCL. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;144(1):46-54. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000005703
16. Stachs A, Dieterich M, Hartmann S, Stubert J, Reimer T, Gerber B. Diagnosis of ruptured breast implants through high-resolution ultrasound combined with real-time elastography. Aesthet Surg J. 2015;35(4):410-418. doi:10.1093/asj/sju057
17. Bang BS, Jung SH, Lee EK, et al. A surgeon’s empirical perspectives on use of high-resolution ultrasound in preoperatively detecting a rupture in the context of breast implant crisis in Korea. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2022;46(4):1668-1678. doi:10.1007/s00266-022-02844-4
18. Satti SK, Mohyuddin A, Qazi K. Diagnostic efficacy of high-resolution ultrasound in the assessment of breast implants. Pak J Radiol. 2020;30(1). Accessed January 13, 2026. https://www.pakjr.com/index.php/PJR/article/view/1171
19. Oliver HL, Stormo J. Sonographic confirmation of intracapsular and extracapsular breast implant rupture. J Diagn Med Sonogr. 2018;35(2):152-156. doi:10.1177/8756479318817286
20. Mude MN. Breast implant rupture: removal and re-implantation: a dual case report. Int Surg J. 2025;12(2):218-221. doi:10.18203/2349-2902.isj20250150
21. Fleury EDFC. Why is the Baker classification inadequate for classifying silicone implant fibrous capsules? Cureus. 2024;16(3):e55776. doi:10.7759/cureus.55776
22. Gorgy A, Barone N, Nepon H, et al. Implant-based breast surgery and capsular formation: when, how and why?-a narrative review. Ann Transl Med. 2023;11(11):385. doi:10.21037/atm-23-1
23. Seiler SJ, Sharma PB, Hayes JC, et al. Multimodality imaging-based evaluation of single-lumen silicone breast implants for rupture. Radiographics. 2017;37(2):366-382. doi:10.1148/rg.2017160086
24. Castillo S, Planas J, Migliano E, Wagenfuhr J. External ultrasonic treatment of capsular contractures in breast implants. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1997;21(5):297-300. doi:10.1007/s002669900143
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Pakistan Journal of Medical and Surgical Aesthetics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Submission declaration
Authors retain the copyright to their work and grant the 'Pakistan Journal of Medical and Surgical Aesthetics (PJMSA)' the right of first publication under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. This license allows others to share, adapt, and reuse the work for any purpose, including commercial use, as long as appropriate credit is given to the original authors and the journal.
By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that the work has not been published previously (except as an abstract, lecture, or academic thesis), is not under review elsewhere, and has been approved by all authors and relevant authorities. Once accepted, the article will be openly accessible under the CC BY 4.0 license, ensuring wide dissemination and reuse with proper attribution.
