• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Tue, 30.04.24

Search results


December 2016
Eyal Klang MD, Michal M. Amitai MD, Stephen Raskin MD, Noa Rozendorn, Nicholas Keddel MD, Jana Pickovsky MD and Miri Sklair-Levy MD

Background: Silicone breast augmentation is a common cosmetic surgery. Previous case reports demonstrated lymphadenopathy in the presence of implant ruptures.

Objectives: To investigate the association between enlarged axillary lymph nodes and silicone implant ruptures as seen on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Methods: Two groups were derived retrospectively from breast MRI reports in our institution for the period December 2011–May 2014. A search of our hospital records for "silicone" and "lymph node" was performed (group A), and the relationship between the presence of enlarged nodes and ruptures was evaluated. The prevalence of ruptures in the presence of nodes was calculated and the association between MRI imaging features and ruptures evaluated. A search for "silicone" and "implant rupture" was performed (group B) and, as for group A, the relationship between the presence of ruptures and nodes was evaluated and the prevalence of enlarged nodes in the presence of ruptures calculated.

Results: Group A comprised 45 women with enlarged nodes. Intracapsular ruptures were associated with nodes (P = 0.005), while extracapsular ruptures showed a trend of association with nodes (P = 0.08). The prevalence of ruptures in the presence of nodes was 31.4%. Nodes associated with ruptures showed a strong silicone signal (P = 0.008) and absent enhancement (P = 0.005). Group B comprised 73 women with ruptures. Enlarged nodes were associated with both intra- and extracapsular ruptures (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002 respectively). The prevalence of nodes in the presence of ruptures was 22.2%.

Conclusions: Enlarged axillary nodes were associated with ruptures in two groups of patients. This finding can guide clinical decisions when either enlarged nodes or ruptures are encountered in patients with silicone implants. The association between silicone lymphadenopathy and implant rupture raises concerns regarding the role of rupture in silicone-induced systemic disease.

 

February 2013
O. Halshtok Neiman, S. Sadetzki, A. Chetrit, S. Raskin, G. Yaniv and C. Hoffmann
 Background: MRI differentiation between metastases and high grade gliomas is a challenging task. Contrast enhancement and size of edema do not provide clear-cut differentiators. The differences in the properties of the peritumoral edema between these tumor types may be exploited to distinguish between them, using MRI perfusion sequences, which are capable of imaging edema in the clinical setting and may be a reliable method to make this differentiation.

Objectives: To assess the ability of perfusion-weighted imaging to differentiate between high grade gliomas and brain metastases.

Methods: During 5 months, 21 patients (age 40–85, median age 61, 16 males and 5 females) with either glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) or metastasis (pathology proven), underwent MRI for assessment of the tumor prior to surgery. Most of the scans were done at 3 Tesla. The scans included perfusion-weighted imaging sequences. Perfusion in the tumor, in the peritumoral edema and in normal tissue were assessed using Functool® software. The ratios of tumor perfusion and peritumoral edema perfusion to normal tissue perfusion were calculated and compared.

Results: Bleeding artifact precluded perfusion assessment in four patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the tumor perfusion ratios of high grade gliomas and those of metastases. The edema perfusion ratios were higher in GBM than in metastases (P = 0.007).

Conclusions: Perfusion-weighted imaging of peritumoral edema can help to differentiate between GBM and metastases.

Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel