ArticleGland surgery2026
Late breast cancer recurrence concurrent with silicone breast implant rupture 17 years after mastectomy and immediate implant-based reconstruction in a 53-year-old woman: a case report.
Article in Gland surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Late locoregional breast cancer recurrence and silicone implant rupture can produce similar cutaneous and periprosthetic abnormalities. However, positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) may mask the true malignant tumor due to implant-related inflammation, resulting in false-negative results. Cases where breast cancer recurrence and silicone implant rupture coexist have rarely been reported. We report histologically confirmed recurrence with silicone implant rupture 17 years after mastectomy and immediate implant-based reconstruction for ductal carcinoma Case Description: A 53-year-old woman presented a 4-month history of progressive peri-areolar skin lesions 17 years after right mastectomy and immediate implant-based reconstruction. The lesions initially appeared in the medial peri-areolar region and subsequently extended toward the nipple, with erythema, ulceration, and crusting. Ultrasonography demonstrated skin and subcutaneous oedema, increased vascularity, multiple hypoechoic periprosthetic lesions, and implant capsule discontinuity. PET/CT showed mildly increased peri-areolar uptake [maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), 5.2] but no discrete hypermetabolic mass or regional nodal involvement; the findings were interpreted as implant rupture-related inflammation. No pre-operative biopsy or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed. The patient underwent excision of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) and involved peri-areolar skin, partial capsulectomy, and implant removal. Intraoperative frozen section confirmed malignancy; implant rupture was identified after capsulotomy. Final histopathological examination revealed a 3.4 cm × 2.5 cm × 2.0 cm, histologic grade 2 invasive ductal carcinoma with multifocal epidermal and subdermal invasion, Paget disease of the nipple, and carcinoma involving the fibrous capsule wall. The tumour was estrogen receptor (ER) positive, progesterone receptor (PR) negative, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative by fluorescence Conclusions: In implant-reconstructed breasts, late-onset skin changes, capsular abnormalities, or new periprosthetic masses warrant timely tissue diagnosis, even when PET/CT does not demonstrate a discrete malignant focus or suggests implant-related inflammation. Imaging findings alone may not reliably distinguish implant rupture-associated changes from locoregional breast cancer recurrence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.