Tuesday, 3 January 2012

PIP breast implants: 'rupture rate low' say private clinics


PIP Implants
The organisation which represents UK private breast implant clinics says the rupture rate of the banned PIP implants is not abnormally high.
The implants caused a health scare after French authorities found a rupture rate of 5%.
The Independent Healthcare Advisory Services (IHAS) says data collected from thousands of patients shows an average rate within the industry standard of 1-2%.
A UK review of the risk is due soon.
The implants by French firm Poly Implant Prothese (PIP) were banned in 2010 after they were found to contain industrial grade silicone gel, rather than medical grade.
The French Government says the implants should be removed as a precaution. Current UK Government advice is that there is no need to have the implants removed as Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) data suggested that the rupture rate is 1% - in line with other implants.
However, the health secretary Andrew Lansley ordered of the rupture rate after conflicting data was submitted. Some reports suggested a rate of up to 7% in the UK.
The latest figures support those from the MHRA.
The Independent Healthcare Advisory Services - which represents companies including Transform, The Harley Medical Group, Spire Healthcare, BMI Hospitals and The Hospital Group - reported a rate of 1-2%.
Its director Sally Taber said: "We are concerned that recent reports on rupture rates do not give a true reflection of the situation and are misleading.
"Following an audit of our members, which includes data on thousands of patients...we can confirm that the average rupture rates reported for PIP implants is within the industry standard of 1-2%."
Tim Goodacre, president of the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS), said: "Even if the rate is 1-2% I am still concerned as that is higher than the normal rate."
Fazel Fatah, president of the British Assocation of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, said there were "many reasons for these figures not being reliable".
He said that without the implant history of every patient, you could not determine the rupture rate with any certainty.
UK response
Key officials responsible for the UK's response to the health scare surrounding faulty breast implants have met.
Mr Lansley held discussions with the chief medical officer, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and Sir Bruce Keogh, the NHS medical director who is leading a review of the rupture rate data.
About 40,000 British women have been fitted with the implants.
The chief medical officer for England, Prof Dame Sally Davies, said before Christmas: "We currently have no evidence to make us think they should have the PIP breast implants removed."
Prime Minister David Cameron's spokesman said: "We need to let Sir Bruce Keogh conduct the review before thinking about the next steps."
The full review group will meet tomorrow to discuss the preliminary findings. An announcement is expected by the end of the week.
Globally more than 300,000 implants are believed to have been sold to 65 countries by PIP over the last 12 years.
More than half of its exports went to South America.
source: bbc.co.uk

Monday, 2 January 2012

Leading British surgeon says 50,000 women SHOULD have breast implants removed - which could cost taxpayer £150m


  • PIP Implants

  • Figures suggest PIP implants have an 8% chance of rupture
  • Some private clinics demanding £3,000 to remove implants
  • Government orders urgent review of safety of PIP implants

  • All women with faulty breast implants should have them removed given the 'uncertainty and lack of knowledge' about the extent of the problems, a leading surgeon warned today.


    Tim Goodacre, a member of the Government-commissioned panel investigating the scandal, said the latest estimate of rupture rates was "very much higher" than he would consider acceptable.
    About 50,000 British women are thought to have received the silicone implants made by Poly Implant Prothese (PIP) filled with gel meant for mattresses.

    The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has said the risk of rupture is only  one per cent, but a cosmetic surgery chain told ministers privately that the figure could be as high as eight per cent.
    Mr Goodacre, president of the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (Bapras), told BBC Radio 4's The World At One: 'Even with a very low rupture rate, we would want to see most implants removed on a staged basis.

    'If you believe a device is faulty, I think this would be true in your car or any other object that you buy, you would want to have that replaced on a staged basis.

    'Certainly this is a very much higher rupture rate than we would consider acceptable at all. Good implants put in by reputable people really have an extraordinarily low failure rate so this is quite out of the ordinary.'
    Mr Goodacre stressed that there was 'no immediate cause for concern' as there was no cancer risk and no evidence of 'major health detriment'.

    But he added: 'Given the fact that there is a degree of uncertainty and lack of knowledge in this, we really are recommending that all implants do come out.'

    The taxpayer could be left to pick up the £150million medical bill for removing the faulty breast implants.
    Some victims say private clinics are demanding up to £3,000 to remove the implants. The clinics argue that they bought the implants in good faith and would face financial ruin if they had to remove them free of charge.
    Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has ordered an urgent review of the safety of the PIP implants and has promised that if there are concerns the Government will ‘act with whatever remedy required’.
    He hopes to publish the review’s findings within days, and industry experts expect him to follow France in advising all women with PIP implants to have them taken out.

    With each operation costing up to £3,000, the total sum involved could reach £150million.
    However MPs and patient groups say it would be ‘outrageous’ for the taxpayer to foot the bill to correct operations which were in the main carried out privately and for cosmetic, rather than medical, reasons.
    Leaks of silicone from the implants can cause agonising pain, as well as swelling and lumps in the breast and armpit, some of which can be easily mistaken by women for tumours, causing unnecessary anxiety.

    There are also fears that the PIP implants, which were among the cheapest on the market, raise the risk of cancer.

    The Daily Mail revealed concerns about the implants in June 2010, when a French inquiry found ‘serious irregularities’ in them.

    A month ago, the implants hit the headlines again with the death from a rare form of cancer of a French woman who had breast augmentation in 2005. While the link with the implants was not established, the French Society of Reconstructive and Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons said the gel could have been an ‘aggravating factor’ in the cancer.
    Britain’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has been accused of playing down the dangers.

    Over the last fortnight it has repeatedly urged women not to panic, simply saying that anyone who was worried should contact her surgeon. While it banned further use of the implants, it said that there was only a 1 per cent chance of rupture, compared with a 5 per cent rate reported in France.

    But on Friday night the MHRA received new data from one of Britain’s biggest chains of plastic surgery clinics. This placed the rupture rate at around 8 per cent, although it was not clear if the figure applied to patients or to individual implants.

    On Saturday, Mr Lansley ordered an urgent review of the safety of the implants.

    The review, which is due to report back early this week, will focus on the risk of rupture, as Mr Lansley is satisfied that the PIP implants do not raise the risk of cancer.

    He said: ‘I want to give further reassurance to women that if there are any safety concerns we will act with whatever remedy that is required.’

    He added that, as yet, there is no evidence which would justify routine removal.

    Nigel Robertson, chief executive of the Transform cosmetic surgery chain, said that clinics bought the implants in good faith and would be forced out of business if they had to shoulder the costs of replacing them.

    But an industry source said clinics have been ‘raking it in’ by using the cut-price implants. He said: ‘They should be insured and we shouldn’t feel too much sympathy for them and their claims they could go under.’

    Fazel Fatah, president of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, said: ‘The clinics didn’t know the implants were as bad as they are. But they bought them because they were so cheap and they made more profit on the package.’

    Joyce Robins of the campaign group Patient Concern said: ‘If the NHS foots the bill, it is going to deprive others of possibly life-saving treatments. If the operation was done for cosmetic reasons, the people who put them in should bear the cost.’

    Philip Davies, Tory MP for Shipley in West Yorkshire, said that only breast cancer patients who had reconstructive surgery on the NHS should have the implants taken out at the taxpayers’ expense.

    ‘It would be outrageous if the NHS picks up the tab,’ he said. ‘For those who had it done privately, it has absolutely nothing to do with the NHS and if they have a problem they should pursue whoever is liable through the courts.

    ‘The taxpayer shouldn’t be picking up the tab for mistakes made by private companies.’
    John O’Connell of the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: ‘Taxpayers will wonder whether this is a priority for NHS budgets.

    ‘Of course patients in a critical state should be treated regardless of the cause, but people who choose to have cosmetic surgery shouldn’t expect hard-working families to pick up the tab if they change their mind.’

    It is claimed that some clinics are refusing to allay women’s fears by telling them the type of implant used unless they pay to see their medical records.

    Andy Burnham, the Shadow Health Secretary, said: ‘That is unacceptable. The Government should work with all healthcare providers to ensure all women have access to their records with delay and without charge.’
    A Department of Health spokesman said predictions that the NHS will pay were ‘speculative’.

    I'm so angry with myself - and scared


    Mother-of-two Sarah House has been left unable to sleep and suffering a never-ending ‘nightmare’ after she found out a faulty implant had ruptured.

    The former social worker and her husband Barry, a retired policeman, have had to remortgage their home in Hereford to cover the costs of treatment.

    Mrs House, now 44, had the original implants put in nine years ago because she was unhappy with her 32AA bust.

    Last month her left breast began to swell and she was told her PIP implant was to blame.

    ‘After tests I was told the implant had ruptured, the fluid had leaked and my body fluid had filled up my breast,’ she said.

    Shortly before Christmas she had the implants replaced at a cost of £7,500. ‘It really is a complete nightmare,’ she said.

    Having always felt self-conscious about her small bust, Catherine Kydd paid £4,000 to have her size increased from 32A to 34C in 2004.

    Six months later, when her left breast began to feel uncomfortable, her surgeon told her the sensation was ‘normal’. But in 2009, the mother of two discovered a lump in her breast and an MRI scan revealed the implant had ruptured.

    After learning she had been given sub-standard PIP implants, and terrified as a result of a family history of breast cancer, she persuaded the clinic – Transform – to replace them for free.

    However, 18 months on, she remains afraid that her health has been damaged.

    ‘I was told the silicone had spread to my lymph nodes but the doctors told me they didn’t feel it was necessary to remove my lymph nodes, that it wouldn’t be a problem,’ said the 39-year-old beauty therapist, from Dartford in Kent.

    ‘But I am terrified. When I am feeling under the weather I get aches under my armpit.’ 

    She set up a Facebook page for women affected by the PIP implant scandal and wants the law changed to ensure records of types of implants used in all surgery are kept in case of future problems.

    Despite having been crowned Miss Great Britain, beauty queen Gemma Garrett always felt uncomfortable that her breasts were different sizes. So when her modelling career began to take off, she paid £4,500 for implants at a private clinic in London in 2008. They were supplied by PIP.

    She contacted the clinic last year after a lump appeared in her left breast but was told the warranty had expired. She was later told by a specialist that an implant had ruptured.

    Miss Garrett, 30, from Belfast,  paid another £11,000 to have both implants removed, but her surgeon told her some of the silicone had fused into her breast, causing lasting complications.

    ‘I now have huge cavities in my breasts where the implants were and, every six weeks, I have to go to hospital, have a needle inserted into my breasts and the blood which has filled up in the cavities drained,’ she said.
    ‘It’s painful and unpleasant. I  am so angry with myself for having the operation in the first place.

    ‘But I am also very scared. Am I going to be OK? I don’t know.’


    source: dailymail.co.uk

    Breast implant scandal: 'Remove all faulty implants'


    PIP Implants

    All 40,000 British women who received faulty breast implants should have them removed if they are leaking as badly as evidence presented to the government suggests, a leading surgeon has warned.

    Tim Goodacre, one of the members of the government-commissioned panel investigating the scandal, said that rupture rates found by the country’s biggest cosmetic surgery company were ‘unacceptable’.
    Mr Goodacre, president of the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS) and an Oxford University lecturer, said that if the panel confirmed the findings – in which almost one in 14 implants had leaked – then they should all be taken out in every case.
    “With this sort of level of implant failure, particularly with this sort of material that isn’t medical grade, it’s sensible that they be removed,” he told The Daily Telegraph. “I think that would be a reasonable way forward.”
    However, the tens of thousands of women who have received the French-made implants could now face a lengthy wait for an official recommendation, due in part to arguments over who should fund the £150 million prospective cost of removals.
    At the moment the Department of Health is only prepared to fund removal of the ‘PIP’ implants if they have already ruptured, causing industrial-grade silicone to leak into surrounding tissue.
    However, that advice was based on the rupture rate quoted by the Medical Healthcare and products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) of just one per cent.
    But at the weekend Transform, Britain’s biggest cosmetic surgery company, disclosed that its own figures showed seven per cent of PIP implants had ruptured since 2006.
    As a result Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, has asked the MHRA to review the data amid concerns incidents have been under-reported.
    Mr Lansley has also asked a group of experts to look at the figures as well, and make recommendations about what can be done about the situation.
    Mr Goodacre said that all the faulty implants should be removed if Transform’s seven per cent figure is validated.
    “Certainly to get rupture rates that Transform are talking about is entirely unacceptable,” he said. “If that is happening and they can validate the data in any meaningful way, then these implants need to be taken out.”
    Should the review panel reach such a conclusion, it would enormously increase the pressure on the Department of Health to fund blanket removal, which could cost £150 million.
    The French state has already agreed to fund such removals – some 30,000 operations – due to the high risk of rupture. In France the official rupture rates with the PIP implants is five per cent.
    Mr Lansley has asked the MHRA and the expert panel, led by Professor Sir Bruce Keogh, medical director of the NHS, to report back to him later this week.
    They are due to meet on Wednesday. Other members include Richard Rainsbury, president of the Association of Breast Surgeons, and Fazel Fatah, president of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons.
    However, Mr Goodacre thought it unlikely that the Department of Health would make a decision on whether or not to recommend blanket removal until it had scrutinised data from across the industry in more detail.
    Due to the way information on breast implants is held – individually by clinics but not centrally – he warned that could take “weeks”.
    “If they want to go back to check the hospital-based registries, that will take time,” he said.
    He emphasised that women with PIP implants were not at imminent risk of them rupturing, and appealed for them to remain calm.
    He advised those with worries to contact their operating surgeon, or failing that their GP.
    Hundreds of women have already joined online support groups to swap information and express their anger at being given faulty implants.
    Many said they were planning to fund removal operations themselves.
    One, Viviana Pineda, wrote on a Facebook support group: “Although I cannot afford this surgery at the moment, I will try to get it done. I just cannot think about living with “this bomb” inside.”
    The panel is also being asked to examine how cosmetic surgery can be better regulated, in light of the episode. Such a report will take longer to compile.
    Professor Dame Sally Davies, Chief Medical Officer of the NHS, said women with PIP implants “should not be unduly worried”.
    She added: “We currently have no evidence to make us think they should have the PIP breast implants removed.
    “Because of this, and because removing these implants carries risk in itself, we are not advising routine removal of these implants.”
    The implants in question were manufactured by Poly Implants Protheses (PIP), a French company. It fraudulently sold them to clinics as being filled with medical-grade silicon, made from material which had been rigorously safety-tested for use in humans.
    In fact they were being filled with a type of industrial-grade silicon used to fill mattresses.
    An anonymous tip-off to the French health authorities last year led to the PIP plant near the Mediterranean coastal town of Toulon being closed down. PIP went into liquidation, with no insurance, leaving no company to sue.
    Last month French health authorities reported that eight cases of cancer, five of which were breast cancer, had been reported in women with PIP implants.
    However, cancer experts in other countries including Britain have dismissed any possible link.
    Nonetheless, women whose PIP implants have ruptured have reported significant pain, particularly below the arm, with lymph nodes becoming clogged with the silicone gel.
    There is also the risk of long-term problems, not least because the gel has not been medically tested.
    source: telegraph.co.uk

    Thursday, 8 December 2011

    Farmer with strong Angus connections killed in tragic accident

    Machinery Claims
    Lincolnshire Claims


    A farmer with strong Angus connections has died in tragic circumstances at his Lincolnshire home.



    William Laird (81) was working on the family farm nearConingsby on Friday afternoon when he was struck by a teleporter handling vehicle being driven by one of his five sons.
    The victim's younger brother, Ivan, is a well-known figure in Angus agricultural circles and spoke of the devastation of family members on both sides of the border.
    The victim was the elder son of the late William Laird of Inverquharity Mill, near Kirriemuir, and although schooled in Lanark retained close ties to Angus before moving south in the late 1950s.
    He trained as a draughtsman and after National Service took over Providence Farm in the hamlet of New York, around 20 miles south-east of Lincoln.
    Mr Laird and his wife, Hilda, have five sons. Four of them — Gordon, Douglas, Graham and Malcolm — followed their father into farming and were involved in running the successful mixed operation at New York. The couple's other son, Ian, is a vet based at Providence Farm.
    Friday's tragedy happened when Malcolm was feeding cattle. Although the exact circumstances of the accident are unclear, it appears he tragically ran over his father when operating the teleporter.
    Speaking to The Courier, Ivan Laird said: ''We are not sure exactly what happened but they were working outside and William was unsighted to Malcolm, who was driving the teleporter.
    ''It was failing light but we do not know the full circumstances. It is a tragedy which has left the whole family shattered.
    ''William was just one of those lads who wouldn't retire and continued to work on the farm with the four boys. The way it happened is dreadful and the family are devastated.''
    He said the Lincolnshire operation was well known as finishers of beef cattle and the family's agricultural involvement also included organising ploughing matches.
    ''The boys' wives are all very active in the community. New York is just a small place and this will have hit many people very hard down there,'' added Mr Laird, from Justinhaugh, nearForfar.
    ''William was very keen on carriage driving and was president of the British Driving Society in his area.
    ''We were schooled in Lanarkshire after my father joined the police there, but the family's roots are in Angus and it has always been regarded as home. When we were younger we came back here at every opportunity.''
    Lincolnshire police confirmed they were aware of the tragedy, but their involvement in the matter had concluded and no further investigation would be carried out.
    The Health and Safety Executive was also part of the inquiry.
    It is understood the matter has now been passed to the local coroner's office, which will handle the post mortem arrangements before the release of Mr Laird's body for a funeral to take place.
    source: thecourier.co.uk

    Bowel cancer screening 'does cut deaths'


    Cancer Misdiagnosis
    A bowel cancer screening programme in England is on course to cut deaths by a sixth, say researchers studying results from the first million people tested.
    However, the work, published in the journal Gut, has raised concerns that the programme, launched in 2006, misses tumours in certain parts of the colon.
    Testers checked a faeces sample for signs of abnormal bleeding.
    The researcher who analysed the results said money should be spent on bringing in more sensitive tests.
    Approximately 16,000 people a year die from bowel cancer, making it second only to lung cancer as a cause of death in the UK.
    Part of the reason for the high mortality rate is that symptoms often do not appear until cancer is advanced and harder to treat.
    The screening programme aims to catch the tumours earlier, meaning more patients can be cured.
    Several million people aged 69 and over have now been screened, with approximately half of those invited taking part.
    When results from the first 1.08 million taking part were collated, it was found that 2.5% of men and 1.5% of women had received an abnormal result, and were sent for further tests, usually colonoscopy, in which a tube with a camera on the end is passed into the colon.
    Early stage cancers
    Among the men with abnormal results, 43% turned out to have either cancer or pre-cancerous growths in their colon. The figure for women was 11.6%.

    Start Quote

    There is a much better test available, but it will cost money to introduce it, and that money is not currently there”
    Prof Richard LoganUniversity of Nottingham
    Most of these were early-stage cancers, which are generally easier to treat.
    Professor Julietta Patnick, director of the NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, said she was "delighted" by the results.
    "We are pleased to be on track to cut bowel cancer deaths by our target of 16% - early detection is crucial to lowering the number deaths from bowel cancer."
    However, the test appeared to be less effective at spotting cancers in the upper section, or "right side" of the colon.
    Cancer statistics from millions of people diagnosed with the disease suggest that for every three cancers in the left side of the colon, there will be one in the right side.
    However, of the thousands of cancers found by the screening test, only 14% were on the right side.
    Questions remain
    Prof Richard Logan, of Nottingham University, who led the study, said it was not yet fully understood why cancers on the right-hand side were not showing up during screening.
    Among the possibilities, he said, were that they grew faster, and were more likely to be diagnosed conventionally, or that they were less likely to bleed and trigger a positive test result.
    However, he said that the current blood test was "old fashioned", and should be replaced by a more modern alternative which might be more sensitive.
    He said: "There is a much better test available, but it will cost money to introduce it, and that money is not currently there."
    A spokesman for the screening programme said that the move to the new test was being "actively considered", although no date had been set for a change.
    Deborah Alsina, the chief executive of Bowel Cancer UK, welcomed the results, adding that separate moves to widen access to a form of colonoscopy called flexible sigmoidoscopy would also improve screening.
    "As a higher proportion of cancers are being found in the left side of the bowel than predicted, the rollout of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in the new year will help to save even more lives.
    "However, this does need to be rolled out quickly with a sustained focus on areas with low uptake of screening."
    source: bbc.co.uk