Observations made by Mr Adrian Richards, Clinical Director of Aurora Clinic.
In response to various conflicting stats from healthcare bodies and national governments regarding PIP rupture rates, Aurora Clinics have decided to publish our own first-hand observations.
Though we have never used these substandard PIP implants, between 10 January and 29 May this year we have removed and replaced breast implants for 165 women who originally received their PIP implants at other clinics.
We found that:
- Of our 165 patients, 31 had rupturing in one or both of their implants – a percentage of almost 17% – much higher than either the French government (5%) or IHAS (1-2%) have suggested.
- Though most of the affected 31 women had only one ruptured implant, 7 of them had ruptures in both – an alarmingly high figure.
- The oldest implants we found with ruptures were originally implanted in 2001, and the most recent only in2008.
- While there was no obvious correlation between batch numbers and rupture rate, 2008 did see a particularly high rupture rate – with 12 of the 31 patients with ruptures having received their implants that year.
- It is also important to note that majority of the 165 patients showed some degree of gel bleed in one or both implants.
This means that even in those implants that had not ruptured and appeared intact, most were still secreting silicone gel into the body – which makes them potentially just as harmful as fully ruptured implants.
While the long-term heath implications of non-medical grade silicone entering the body are not yet known, and the official government guidelines maintain that there is not enough evidence to recommend early removal of PIPS, our findings make for interesting, if alarming, reading.