Superiority of the Dutch Breast Implant Registry over electronic patient records in tracing breast implants: results of a test recall

BACKGROUND: The Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP) scandal in 2010 led to the first-ever international recall, revealing shortcomings in electronic patient records (EPRs) to effectively trace patients with PIP implants. In response, the Dutch Breast Implant Registry (DBIR) was established. This study aimed to investigate the track-and-trace ability of DBIR in a test recall setting. METHODS: All patients in DBIR who received a breast implant between 2015 and 2019 in one of the pilot hospitals were included. A test recall scenario was drafted and translated to implant specifications as stated in the DBIR dataset. A third trusted party extracted patients per pilot hospital whose implants fell within the recall scenario. Subsequently, DBIR-data were compared to EPR-data. The number of traced implants with solely EPR versus traced with EPR and data from DBIR were compared. RESULTS: In total, 1113 implants (726 patients) matched the recall scenarios. Significantly more implants could be traced with additional DBIR-data than with EPRs alone (n=1011 [90.8%; 95% CI, 89.1%-92.5%] versus n=915 [80.9%; 95% CI, 78.6%-83.2%], respectively). Due to incorrectly registered patient identifiers or missing implant data in EPRs and DBIR, 102 implants were untraceable. CONCLUSION: This first-ever test recall study proved that adding DBIR-data to EPRs allows for tracing more implants and patients. Our study emphasizes the importance of complete and correct data registration in implant registries, so that patients can be informed in a timely and reliable way in case of an actual recall.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery
Published
2026-06-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000013285
Primary Topic
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Superiority of the Dutch Breast Implant Registry over electronic patient records in tracing breast implants: results of a test recall

Xavier H.A. Keuter, J. Juliët Vrolijk, Puck E Melse, Louisa S. Smid et al.
Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
article

Superiority of the Dutch Breast Implant Registry over electronic patient records in tracing breast implants: results of a test recall

Xavier H.A. Keuter, J. Juliët Vrolijk, Puck E Melse, Louisa S. Smid, Hinne A. Rakhorst, Marc A.M. Mureau, Thijs A. Bruins
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP) scandal in 2010 led to the first-ever international recall, revealing shortcomings in electronic patient records (EPRs) to effectively trace patients with PIP implants. In response, the Dutch Breast Implant Registry (DBIR) was established. This study aimed to investigate the track-and-trace ability of DBIR in a test recall setting. METHODS: All patients in DBIR who received a breast implant between 2015 and 2019 in one of the pilot hospitals were included. A test recall scenario was drafted and translated to implant specifications as stated in the DBIR dataset. A third trusted party extracted patients per pilot hospital whose implants fell within the recall scenario. Subsequently, DBIR-data were compared to EPR-data. The number of traced implants with solely EPR versus traced with EPR and data from DBIR were compared. RESULTS: In total, 1113 implants (726 patients) matched the recall scenarios. Significantly more implants could be traced with additional DBIR-data than with EPRs alone (n=1011 [90.8%; 95% CI, 89.1%-92.5%] versus n=915 [80.9%; 95% CI, 78.6%-83.2%], respectively). Due to incorrectly registered patient identifiers or missing implant data in EPRs and DBIR, 102 implants were untraceable. CONCLUSION: This first-ever test recall study proved that adding DBIR-data to EPRs allows for tracing more implants and patients. Our study emphasizes the importance of complete and correct data registration in implant registries, so that patients can be informed in a timely and reliable way in case of an actual recall.

Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery
University Medical Center Groningen (NL), University of Groningen (NL), Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL), Medisch Spectrum Twente (NL), Maastricht University (NL), Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (NL), Erasmus MC Cancer Institute (NL), Deventer Ziekenhuis (NL)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.