Help women with faulty breast implants, says Labour

Shadow health secretary Andy Burnham has called on the cosmetic surgery industry to honour its responsibilities and help patients who have received faulty implants. It follows warnings from a leading plastic surgeon that the faulty implants should be removed from UK patients.

Health secretary Andrew Lansley will meet an expert group tomorrow to discuss preliminary findings of a review into Poly Implant Prosthese (PIP) breast implants.

French authorities have recommended that all women who have PIP breast implants should have them removed as a preventative measure because of health concerns about high rates of implant rupture and cancer.

This followed reports in France of the death of a woman with PIP breast implants from anaplastic large cell lymphoma, a rare form of cancer which affects cells of the immune system.

PIP was shut down last year after the company was found to be using cheaper industrial silicone.

New evidence

About 40,000 British women are thought to have received PIP silicone implants, but UK authorities have so far maintained that there is no evidence to support routine removal.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has said the risk of rupture is only 1 per cent, but a cosmetic surgery chain told ministers privately that the figure could be as high as 8 per cent.

Health Secretary Andrew Lansley launched the review of the risks from faulty breast implants after receiving new evidence from major cosmetic surgery firm Transform.

The MHRA will also be conducting an audit of evidence to resolve concerns about the “content and quality of the data that cosmetic surgery providers are sharing with the regulator”.

Andy Burnham said that private firms should fund consultations for women who want to see a doctor and discuss their options.

“You get the distinct impression here we are dealing with an industry that’s good at the sales pitch and taking the money up front, but less good at the after-care and facing up to responsibilities when things go wrong,” said Mr Burnham.

He accused the industry of “evading responsibilities” and told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme that companies should pay for immediate corrective surgery if any evidence of rupture was found.

“It’s just not acceptable to hear they have refused to do that,” he added.

A discussion of health and regulatory experts from France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Hungary, Austria, Denmark and Malta took place last month.

The experts agreed that there was no evidence of any increase in incidents of cancer associated with PIP breast implants and no evidence of any disproportionate rupture rates other than in France.

‘Uncertainty’

But a leading surgeon has warned that all women with faulty breast implants should have them removed, given the “uncertainty and lack of knowledge” about the extent of the problems.

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.

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.

But he stressed that there was “no immediate cause for concern” as there was no cancer risk and no evidence of “major health detriment”.

Tory MP Stephen Dorrell, chairman of the Commons health select committee, said the cost of removing implants should be recovered from those who provided “sub-standard products”.

“The first responsibility here would rest on those who were engaged in care that hasn’t met proper standards, so the first responsibility rests on them,” he told The World At One.

“Having said that, clearly if there is a health issue involved then ultimately the NHS exists to provide health assurance for all patients in the UK.

“But I think it would be entirely reasonable to seek to recover some of this cost off those who have provided sub-standard products.”