Elsevier

Annals of Epidemiology

Volume 8, Issue 5, July 1998, Pages 319-326
Annals of Epidemiology

Original Reports
A Case-Control Study of Prosthetic Implants and Selected Chronic Diseases in Medicare Claims Data

https://doi.org/10.1016/S1047-2797(97)00212-3Get rights and content

Abstract

PURPOSE: In an exploratory case-control study of a private insurance-claims database, Greenland and Finkle observed associations of certain prosthetic nonbreast implants with certain connective-tissue and neurologic conditions. We wished to test these associations using the same design with new data.

METHODS: We examined these associations in a case-control analysis of Medicare claims data. To control for possible confounding effects of surgery, our analysis examined nonimplant surgeries of severity similar to implant surgeries.

RESULTS: We again found associations of silicone and metal implants with connective-tissue and neurologic conditions, but we also found similar associations of carpal-tunnel surgery with those conditions.

CONCLUSIONS: Possible explanations for these findings include confounding by presurgical conditions. Therefore, we recommend further studies be done in which such conditions can be measured and controlled.

Introduction

Controversy regarding alleged effects of silicone-containing breast implants on connective-tissue and neurologic diseases has had considerable impact on American society. Claims involving hundred of thousands of women and billions of dollars have led to the unprecedented formation of a special scientific advisory panel by the Federal courts, and a bankruptcy filing by Dow-Corning Corporation (1). There have been numerous epidemiologic studies of breast implants; see the FDA review of studies published through 1995 (2) and other studies published since then (e.g., 3, 4, 5, 6, 7). All of these studies suffer from methodologic limitations, such as unstable estimates of effects on rare outcomes or vulnerabilities to selection biases, and their interpretation remains highly controversial 1, 2. At most, it might be agreed the studies suggest that no large effects are present 1, 2.

Motivated by the above controversy, a few groups have also examined the relation of other implanted devices to the diseases in question 6, 7, 8. A University of Michigan group 6, 7 conducted population-based case-control studies of silicone-exposures (including those from medical devices) and non-silicone devices, in relation to scleroderma and undifferentiated connective tissue disease (UCTD), defined as ICD9 710.9 (“collagen disease not otherwise specified”). They had too few exposed scleroderma cases to yield clear results; they did however detect associations of both silicone-containing and silicone-free devices with UCTD.

Greenland and Finkle (8) conducted an exploratory case-control study of prosthetic non-breast implants in a private health-insurance claims database. This study examined both metal-and silicone-containing implants, under the assumption that metal implants would serve as a control exposure for silicone implants (both types of implant are associated with similar indications and medications). Both silicone and metal implants exhibited associations with certain connective-tissue and neurologic conditions, raising the possibility that surgery or indications for surgery (rather than the implants) may have been responsible for those associations.

In all the non-breast implants studies, most of the associations were quite unstable due to the limited numbers of implanted patients. Hence, we conducted another case-control study using public-use Medicare records. The served population is quite different from the original, being older on average (most Medicare recipients are over 65, whereas most of the persons in the original study were under 65). Because the incidence of the diseases in question increases with age and the Medicare population is very large, far more cases were available for study. To investigate whether surgery or surgical indications were responsible for the original observations, we included in the second study several non-implant surgical procedures that involved similar degrees of invasiveness, anaesthesia duration, and perisurgical medication as implant operations.

Section snippets

Population and Database

The Medicare population comprises approximately 35 million U.S. citizens covered by the Medicare program. The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) provides a five percent sample of the data file of the insured. The data in the present study were obtained from the HCFA samples for 1991 to 1994. The files contain age, sex, outpatient, and inpatient procedures, and dates of occurrence, so that patients with implants may be identified by date of procedures or diagnoses for which claims were

Results

TABLE 2., TABLE 3., TABLE 4., TABLE 5., TABLE 6., TABLE 7. present the unstratified counts and the age-sex-year adjusted hierarchical regression estimates for each surgical category. To illustrate the data in these tables, consider chronic thyroiditis. There were 3156 cases found TABLE 2., TABLE 3., TABLE 4., TABLE 5., of whom 512 were men TABLE 6., TABLE 7.. Among these cases there were three with silicone bone and joint implants at least one year prior to diagnosis (Table 2). In contrast, 143

Discussion

Because our first study had so few implanted cases, it yielded few stable estimates. The present study, with its larger numbers, suggests that certain observations in our first study were not due to random error or peculiarities of the first study population. For example, the hierarchical logistic odds-ratio estimate for the association of silicone bone and joint implants with ankylosing spondylitis was 3.01 (95% CL 1.17, 7.77) in our first study, versus 3.43 (1.96, 5.98) here; the estimate for

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Peter Alexakis, M.D., Edward O’Connor, M.D., and Andrew Spitzer, M.D. for consultations regarding surgeries and implants, and the referees for suggestions that improved the clarity of the presentation. This work was supported by Dow-Corning Corporation.

References (12)

  • S. Greenland et al.

    A case-control study of prosthetic implants and selected chronic diseases

    Ann Epidemiol.

    (1996)
  • United States District Court Northern District, Southern Division. In re: Silicone Gel Breast Implant Products...
  • B.G. Silverman et al.

    Reported complications of silicone gel breast implantsAn epidemiologic review

    Ann Intern Med.

    (1996)
  • F. Wolfe

    Silicone breast implants and the risk of fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis (abstract)

    Arth Rheum.

    (1995)
  • C.H. Hennekens et al.

    Self-reported breast implants and connective-tissue diseases in female health professionals

    JAMA.

    (1996)
  • D. Friis et al.

    Connective tissue disease and other rheumatic conditions following breast implants in Denmark

    Ann Plast Surg.

    (1997)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (17)

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text