Prevalence of women with breast implants in Sweden: a study based on the population-based mammography screening programme

Emma Hansson; Sarah Zaya; Susanne Meyer; Alexa Freiin von Wrangel; Fredrik Wärnberg; Sophia Zackrisson

doi:10.2340/jphs.v58.15298

Authors

Emma Hansson Department of Plastic Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of Plastic Surgery, Gothenburg, Sweden
Sarah Zaya Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of Radiology and Mammography, Gothenburg, Sweden
Susanne Meyer Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of Plastic Surgery, Gothenburg, Sweden
Alexa Freiin von Wrangel Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of Radiology and Mammography, Gothenburg, Sweden
Fredrik Wärnberg Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Göteborg, Sweden; Region Västra Götaland, Department of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden
Sophia Zackrisson Department of Translational Medicine, Diagnostic Radiology, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden; Department of Medical Imaging and Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2340/jphs.v58.15298

Keywords:

breast implant prevalence, mammography, plastic surgery

Abstract

Background: Knowledge about the prevalence of women with breast implants is paramount in calculations of risks and in estimations of effects on screening and breast cancer treatment. Most of the estimations of prevalence made to date are rough and often based on sales data. The main aim of this study was to calculate the prevalence of breast implants in Swedish women. The secondary aim was to investigate if it is feasible to establish the occurrence of breast implants with the help of the public mammography screening programme, in a country with a publicly funded welfare-type healthcare system and with a clear documentation of screening.

Methods: Information on implants was prospectively collected from all screening attendants from 1st of February 2022 to 1st of August 2022 based on a question from the radiographer to the woman and later verified on the mammogram.

Results: During the study period 4,639 women were screened, of which 182 had implants (3.9%). The frequency varies between 1.6 and 6.4% in different age groups.

Conclusion: The prevalence of breast implants in Swedish women is estimated to be around 4%. The population-based mammography screening programme in countries with a publicly funded welfare-type healthcare system and a clear documentation of mammography screening attendance, seems to be a feasible way to establish the prevalence of breast implants in the population. The large number of women with breast implants warrants further studies regarding the best diagnostic and treatment alternatives for this group.

Pre-registration: ClinicalTrials.Gov identifier NCT05222100.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Collett DJ, Rakhorst H, Lennox P, et al. Current risk estimate of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma in textured breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019; 143(3S A Review of Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma): 30S–40S. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000005567 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000005567

Miglioretti DL, Rutter CM, Geller BM, et al. Effect of breast augmentation on the accuracy of mammography and cancer characteristics. JAMA. 2004; 291(4): 442–450. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.4.442 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.4.442

Tang SS, Gui GP. A review of the oncologic and surgical management of breast cancer in the augmented breast: diagnostic, surgical and surveillance challenges. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011; 18(8): 2173–2181. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-1578-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-1578-6

American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Plastic surgery statistics report. ASPS National Clearinghouse of Plastic Surgery Procedural Statistics. 2020. Available from: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2020/plastic-surgery-statistics-full-report-2020.pdf

Cosmetic Surgery National Data Bank Statistics. Aesthet Surg J. 2018; 38(suppl_3): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjy132 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjy132

de Boer M, van Middelkoop M, Hauptmann M, et al. Breast implant prevalence in the Dutch female population assessed by chest radiographs. Aesthet Surg J. 2020; 40(2): 156–164. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjz136 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjz136

Santanelli di Pompeo F, Firmani G, Paolini G, et al. Determining breast implant prevalence: a population study of Italian chest radiographs. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2023; 47: 957–965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03290-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03290-6

Sonden ECB, Sebuodegard S, Korvald C, et al. [Cosmetic breast implants and breast cancer]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2020; 140(3). https://doi.org/10.4045/tidsskr.19.0266 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4045/tidsskr.19.0266

Kam K, Lee E, Pairawan S, et al. The effect of breast implants on mammogram outcomes. Am Surg. 2015; 81(10): 1053–1056. https://doi.org/10.1177/000313481508101028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000313481508101028

Kim E, Moy L, Gao Y, et al. City patterns of screening mammography uptake and disparity across the United States. Radiology. 2019; 293(1): 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019190647 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019190647

Heller SL, Rosenkrantz AB, Gao Y, et al. County-level factors predicting low uptake of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018; 211(3): 624–629. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.19541 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.19541

Schueler KM, Chu PW, Smith-Bindman R. Factors associated with mammography utilization: a systematic quantitative review of the literature. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2008; 17(9): 1477–1498. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2007.0603 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2007.0603

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007; 370(9596): 1453–1457. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X

Olsson S, Andersson I, Karlberg I, et al. Implementation of service screening with mammography in Sweden: from pilot study to nationwide programme. J Med Screen. 2000; 7(1): 14–18. https://doi.org/10.1136/jms.7.1.14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jms.7.1.14

Socialstyrelsen, editor. Screening för bröstcancer. Rekommendation och bedömningsunderlag. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen; 2015.

Lagerlund M, Akesson A, Zackrisson S. Change in mammography screening attendance after removing the out-of-pocket fee: a population-based study in Sweden (2014–2018). Cancer Causes Control. 2021; 32(11): 1257–1268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-021-01476-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-021-01476-4

Lagerlund M, Akesson A, Zackrisson S. Population-based mammography screening attendance in Sweden 2017–2018: a cross-sectional register study to assess the impact of sociodemographic factors. Breast. 2021; 59: 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2021.05.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2021.05.011

Swedish Confederation of Regional Cancer Centres. National guidelines for breast cancer [Nationellt vårdprogram bröstcancer] [Internet]. Stockholm; 2020. [Cited: 9th of August 2023] Available from: https://kunskapsbanken.cancercentrum.se/diagnoser/brostcancer/vardprogram/

von Soest T, Torgersen L, Kvalem IL. Mental health and psychosocial characteristics of breast augmentation patients. J Health Psychol. 2020; 25(9): 1270–1284. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105318754645 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105318754645

Paap E, Witjes M, van Landsveld-Verhoeven C, et al. Mammography in females with an implanted medical device: impact on image quality, pain and anxiety. Br J Radiol. 2016; 89(1066): 20160142. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20160142 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20160142

Swedish Breast Implant Registry (BRIMP). Annual report 2021. [BRIMP – Bröstimplantatregistret Årsrapport 2021] [Internet]. Centre of Registers Västra Götaland. Gothenburg. 2022. [ Cited: 9th of August 2023] Available from: https://registercentrum.blob.core.windows.net/brimp/r/BRIMP_annual-report-2021-SkeNVyrX1h.pdf

Swedish Breast Implant Registry (BRIMP). Annual report 2019. [BRIMP – Bröstimplantatregistret Årsrapport 2019] [Internet]. Centre of Registers Västra Götaland. Gothenburg; 2020. Available from: https://registercentrum.blob.core.windows.net/brimp/r/BRIMP-Annual-Report-2019-HJeBIdtlJP.pdf

Spronk PER, Becherer BE, Hommes J, et al. How to improve patient safety and quality of care in breast implant surgery? First outcomes from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry (2015–2017). J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2019; 72(10): 1607–1615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2019.06.023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2019.06.023

Sa Dos Reis C, Gremion I, Richli Meystre N. Study of breast implants mammography examinations for identification of suitable image quality criteria. Insights Imaging. 2020; 11(1): 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0816-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0816-5

Larsen M, Moshina N, Sagstad S, et al. Factors associated with attendance and attendance patterns in a population-based mammographic screening program. J Med Screen. 2021; 28(2): 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969141320932945 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0969141320932945