Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 348

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bacterial Biofilm Infection Detected in Breast Implant–Associated Anaplastic Large-Cell Lymphoma

Hu, Honghua, Johani, Khalid, Almatroudi, Ahmad, Vickery, Karen, Van Natta, Bruce, Kadin, Marshall E., Brody, Garry, Clemens, Mark, Cheah, Chan Yoon, Lade, Stephen, Joshi, Preeti Avinash, Prince, H. Miles, Deva, Anand K.·2016·Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery

Abstract

Background: A recent association between breast implants and the development of anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) has been observed. The purpose of this study was to identify whether bacterial biofilm is present in breast implant–associated ALCL and, if so, to compare the bacterial microbiome to nontumor capsule samples from breast implants with contracture. Methods: Twenty-six breast implant–associated ALCL samples were analyzed for the presence of biofilm by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction, next-generation sequencing, fluorescent in situ hybridization, and scanning electron microscopy, and compared to 62 nontumor capsule specimens. Results: Both the breast implant–associated ALCL and nontumor capsule samples yielded high mean numbers of bacteria (breast implant–associated ALCL, 4.7 × 10 6 cells/mg of tissue; capsule, 4.9 × 10 6 cells/mg of tissue). Analysis of the microbiome in breast implant–associated ALCL specimens showed significant differences with species identified in nontumor capsule specimens. There was a significantly greater proportion of Ralstonia spp. present in ALCL specimens compared with nontumor capsule specimens (p < 0.05). In contrast, significantly more Staphylococcus spp. were found associated with nontumor capsule specimens compared with breast implant–associated ALCL specimens (p < 0.001). Bacterial biofilm was visualized both on scanning electron microscopy and fluorescent in situ hybridization. Conclusions: This novel finding of bacterial biofilm and a distinct microbiome in breast implant–associated ALCL samples points to a possible infectious contributing cause. Breast implants are widely used in both reconstructive and aesthetic surgery, and strategies to reduce their contamination should be more widely studied and practiced. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, V.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/prs.0000000000002010

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 348

Metadata

Authors
Hu, H., Johani, K., Almatroudi, A., Vickery, K., Van Natta, B., Kadin, M. E., Brody, G., Clemens, M., Cheah, C. Y., Lade, S., Joshi, P. A., Prince, H. M., & Deva, A. K.
Venue
Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery
Published
2016-06
Volume
137
Issue
6
Pages
1659-1669
ISSN
0032-1052 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2296908670
Cited by
348
References
2
FWCI
52.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bacterial Biofilm Infection Detected in Breast Implant–Associated Anaplastic Large-Cell Lymphoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/prs.0000000000002010
The paper
Hu, H., Johani, K., Almatroudi, A., Vickery, K., Van Natta, B., Kadin, M. E., Brody, G., Clemens, M., Cheah, C. Y., Lade, S., Joshi, P. A., Prince, H. M., & Deva, A. K. (2016). Bacterial Biofilm Infection Detected in Breast Implant–Associated Anaplastic Large-Cell Lymphoma. Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000002010

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.