Injection mammoplasty: Normal imaging appearances, complications, and implications for mammographic screening

Article type: Review Article

Authors: Goh, Winfred Xi Tai^a; | Lee, Yien Sien^b | Teo, Sze Yiun^b

Affiliations: [a] MOH Holdings Pte Ltd, Singapore | [b] Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore

Correspondence: [*] Corresponding author: Winfred Xi Tai Goh, MD, FRCR, MOH Holdings Pte Ltd., 1 Maritime Square, #11-25 HarbourFront Centre, Singapore 099253, Singapore. Tel.: +65 8754 2589; E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5135-1455

Abstract: BACKGROUND:The normal imaging appearances of the common agents used in injection mammoplasty and the challenges of mammography screening will be reviewed. METHODS:The local database from a tertiary hospital was accessed for imaging cases of injection mammoplasty. RESULTS:Free silicone is seen as multiple high-density opacities on mammograms. Silicone deposits can often be seen within axillary nodes due to lymphatic migration. Sonographically, a snowstorm appearance is seen when the silicone is diffusely distributed. On MRI, free silicone is hypointense on T1-weighted and hyperintense on T2-weighted images, with no contrast enhancement. Mammograms have a limited role in screening due to the high density of silicone. MRI is often required in these patients.Polyacrylamide gel and hyaluronic acid are seen as multiple collections on mammography. Polyacrylamide gel collections are of the same density as cysts, while hyaluronic acid collections are of higher density but less dense than silicone. On ultrasound, both can appear anechoic or show variable internal echoes. MRI demonstrates fluid signal with hypointense T1-weighted and hyperintense T2-weighted signal. Mammographic screening is possible if the injected material is located predominantly in the retro-glandular space without obscuring the breast parenchyma.On mammograms, autologous fat locules appear as lucent masses. Rim calcification can be seen if fat necrosis had developed. On ultrasound, focal fat collections can demonstrate varying levels of internal echogenicity, depending on the stage of fat necrosis. Mammographic screening is usually possible for patients after autologous fat injection as fat is hypodense compared to breast parenchyma. However, the dystrophic calcification associated with fat necrosis may mimic abnormal breast calcification. In such cases, MRI can be utilized as a problem-solving tool. CONCLUSION:It is important for the radiologist to recognize the type of injected material on the various imaging modalities and recommend the best modality for screening.

Keywords: Injection mammoplasty, mammography, breast ultrasound, breast MRI

DOI: 10.3233/BD-220059

Journal: Breast Disease, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 37-44, 2023