Back to 2025 Abstracts
Profiling Breast Implant Rupture: A Systematic Review And Meta-analysis Of Patient, Surgical, And Device Characteristics
Parul Rai, BS, Matthew Dao, BS, Jason Zhang, BS, Reyna A. Patel, BS, Marie M. Mina, Anitesh Bajaj, BS, Emily George, MD, Gabrielle C. Rodriguez, MD, Kathryn R. Reisner, BA, Arun K. Gosain, MD.
Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
PURPOSE: Clinical trials and retrospective studies have examined breast rupture. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides a comprehensive synthesis of the evidence to assess patient, surgical, and implant characteristics associated with this complication.
METHODS: The PubMed, CINHAL, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles on October 26, 2024. This systematic review includes observational studies involving adult females who experienced implant rupture following breast augmentation or reconstruction. Results were synthesized using random-effects models to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: This meta-analysis of 20 studies (15,811 implants) found that round implants were associated with a significantly higher rupture risk compared to anatomical implants (RR = 2.27 [1.04-4.94], p = 0.0387). Similarly, implants placed in the subpectoral plane had higher risk of rupture compared to those in the prepectoral plane (RR = 1.63 [1.22-218], p = 0.0007). No significant differences in rupture risk were found between saline and silicone implants, smooth and textured implants, or aesthetic versus reconstructive patients.
CONCLUSION: Implant shape and plane may affect the risk of breast implant rupture, with round implants and subpectoral placement being associated with higher rupture rates. These findings can inform clinical decision-making and surgical planning to minimize the risk of this complication.
Back to 2025 Abstracts
