{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012148337595907928, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.548117154811716, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Breast prostheses and their complications].

In the past few years silicone breast implants have been a highly charged and controversial topic for psychologic, health and politico-legal reasons for patients and for surgical, medical and research concern for professionals. Both sides are interested in knowing about the complications encountered with these implants on one hand and to find the ideal device needed for mammary reconstruction on the other. Indeed silicone does not fulfill the characteristics initially expected for a synthetic soft-tissue substitute. The local cellular response leads to the formation of a capsule around the implant with frequently unsatisfying cosmetic results. The well described leakage occurring through the silicone envelope allows the silicone gel to diffuse to multiple anatomic areas in the body. Scientific works demonstrated that silicone gel acts as a potent immunologic adjuvant and can induce antibodies to silicone surface-associated antigens. Breast implanted women who present with systemic clinical symptoms can be included either in the group of well defined connective tissue diseases or in the atypical connective tissue disease-like syndrome. The largest epidemiologic studies have shown reassuring evidence against large hazards but have documented a low but statistically significant risk of connective-tissue diseases in women with silicone gel filled implants. Practitioners must manage these patients with the awareness that reliable objective tests to identify the useful problem are not yet available.