PIP implants not toxic - final report

A defective silicone gel breast implant, which was removed from a patient and manufactured by French company Poly Implant Prothese A ruptured PIP breast implant

Related Stories

The final report into the PIP breast implant scandal has concluded that the gel material does not cause a long-term threat to human health.

It says the implants, which were made with unauthorised silicone filler, are not toxic nor carcinogenic.

The review, led by Prof Sir Bruce Keogh, the NHS medical director, said they do have double the rupture rate of other implants.

Around 47,000 women in the UK have had the implants fitted.

Around 95% were fitted privately. A minority of operations were carried out on the NHS, mostly for breast reconstruction following cancer.

In January Prof Keogh's team concluded there was insufficient evidence to recommend the routine removal of PIP implants. But it recognised the concern that the issue was causing.

It found there was no link between PIP implants and cancer, and the evidence on increased rupture rates was inconclusive.

His final report has just been published.

Gemma Pepper had PIP implants fitted days before questions surfaced about their safety

Prof Keogh said women had faced an "incredibly worrying time".

He said that repeated tests in many countries have "shown that the implants are not toxic and therefore we do not believe they are a threat to the long-term health of women who have PIP implants".

He added: "We have however found that these implants are substandard, when compared to other implants and that they are more likely to rupture. We would therefore advise that women who have symptoms of a rupture - for example tenderness, soreness or lumpiness - should speak to their surgeon or GP."

The president of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, Fazel Fatah, said: "Despite rigorous testing showing no long-term danger to human health from the individual chemicals in the gel, the fact remains that PIPs are significantly more likely to rupture and leak and, therefore, cause physical reactions in an unacceptable proportion of the patients.

Rupture Rate

  • The report says the PIP implants have around double the rupture rate of other implants.
  • After five years, the rate is between 6% and 12%.
  • After 10 years, the rate is between 15% and 30%
  • Other brands have a failure rate between 10% and 14% after a decade.

"We agree with the report findings that anxiety itself is a form of health risk and thus it is entirely reasonable for women to have the right to opt for removal - regardless of whether there has been rupture."

The advice for patients has not changed.

Throughout the UK any women who had PIP implants fitted on the NHS can get them removed and replaced free of charge.

In Wales the NHS will also replace those of private patients. In England and Scotland the NHS will remove implants of private patients but not replace them.

Last month, a separate review led by Health Minister Lord Howe examined the role of the Department of Health and the UK regulator the MHRA.

It said serious lessons must be learned and questioned how well women with these implants were informed about the risks.

Fergus Walsh Article written by Fergus Walsh Fergus Walsh Medical correspondent

Defeating cancer, the 'evil genius'

Can we win the war against cancer? Over the past 18 months, Panorama has followed a group of patients on drug trials. Some who'd been given months to live, are keeping cancer at bay for years.

Read full article

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 273.

    Obviously not dangerous from the start.

    All these shallow 'ladies' who have implants should be made to pay double - once for the installation and once into a fund for their eventual removal. They've got to come out in the end.

    While we're on the topic, shame on the cosmetic surgeons for wasting their abilities on such rubbish when they could be helping people with genuine problems.

  • rate this

    Comment number 272.

    Me@ 271
    Sorry meant MHRA not MRHA apparently that's the Midland Regional Hockey Association. Bedtime I think! ;-)

  • rate this

    Comment number 271.

    SpacePirateFTW@260 You raise an interesting point as to which body had regulatory responsibility for PIP implants but its irrelevant in my view. Their use was approved by the MRHA until 2010 despite concerns being raised much earlier. The MRHA could have acted on those concerns and issued appropriate guidance at any time and failed to do so. This gave an implied legitimacy to PIP implants.

  • rate this

    Comment number 270.

    If we are to exclude the NHS from providing preventative action for this fiasco, perhaps the highly paid doctors involved would be prepared to give their time FOC. But clearly this profession is so impoverished it needs to strike to support under funded tax payer subsidised pension pots of up to 1.6 million. If you earn 100k+ try saving instead of expecting everyone else to sustain your lifestyle.

  • rate this

    Comment number 269.

    239. Name Number 6
    238. No_7
    Alcohol is a massive help to physical attraction.
    Yours or theirs?


Comments 5 of 273



  • A very clever little girlBrain gain

    Why are people getting better at intelligence tests?

  • BeefaloBeefalo hunt

    The hybrid animal causing havoc in the Grand Canyon

  • A British Rail signBringing back BR

    Would it be realistic to renationalise the railways?

  • Banksy image of girl letting go of heart-shaped balloonFrom the heart

    Fergal Keane on the relationship between love and politics

  • Don Roberto Placa Quiet Don

    The world's worst interview - with one of the loneliest men on Earth

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.