Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
There was no indication that long-term follow-up would differ between any of the studies that have evaluated devices within the 410 Style Matrix.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This is a prospective, multicenter study of the safety and effectiveness of NATRELLE® 410 Highly Cohesive, Anatomically Shaped, Silicone-Filled X-Style and L-Style Breast Implants.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Augmentation | Experimental | Women who had breast augmentation with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
|
| Reconstruction | Experimental | Women who had breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
|
| Revision-Augmentation | Experimental | Women who had revision of a previous breast augmentation with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
|
| Revision-Reconstruction | Experimental | Women who had revision of a previous breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anatomically shaped, silicone-filled breast implants with low projection or extra-full projection | Device | Surgical implant |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants According to Investigator Satisfaction With Implants | The investigator rated their satisfaction with the participant's breast implant for each breast on a 5-point scale (1=Definitely dissatisfied, 2=Somewhat dissatisfied,3=Neither satisfied or dissatisfied, 4=Somewhat satisfied, 5=Definitely satisfied). If there was a different response for the left and right breasts the worst response was used. The percentage of participants where the investigator responded: "Definitely satisfied" or "Somewhat satisfied" is reported. | 3 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
| Percentage of Participants According to Participant Satisfaction With Implants | The participant rated their satisfaction with the breast implant for each breast on a 5-point scale (1=Definitely dissatisfied, 2=Somewhat dissatisfied, 3=Neither satisfied or dissatisfied, 4=Somewhat satisfied, 5=Definitely satisfied). If there was a different response for the left and right breasts the worst response was used. The percentage of participants who responded: "Definitely satisfied" or "Somewhat satisfied" is reported. | 3 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With Local Complications | Kaplan-Meier risk rates (estimation of the percentage of participants) of developing local complications is presented. Local complications collected in the study were: Asymmetry, Breast Pain, Capsular contracture, Delayed wound healing, Fluid accumulation/seroma, Implant malposition, Implant palpability/visibility. Implant rupture, Infection, Ptosis, Redness, Swelling, Wrinkling/rippling and Other complications (calcifications on mammogram, thing of mastectomy flap, deformity and nipple stretching). |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
For entry in this study, participants must have been enrolled in the 410 Continued Access (CA) Clinical Study or 410 Continued Access Reconstruction/Revision Expansion (CARE) Clinical Study under the inclusion criteria listed below and received NATRELLE® 410 Highly Cohesive, Anatomically Shaped, Silicone-Filled X-Styles or L-Styles breast implants
Female, age 18 or older
Present with 1 or more of the following conditions:
Has adequate tissue available to cover implants
Willing to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the specified follow-up visits for subjects at MRI designated sites and be eligible for MRI (e.g., no implanted metal or metal devices, no history of severe claustrophobia)
Exclusion Criteria:
For entry in this study, participants must have been enrolled in the 410 CA Clinical Study or 410 CARE Clinical Study, meeting the exclusion criteria listed below, did not receive any NATRELLE® 410 Highly Cohesive, Anatomically Shaped, Silicone-Filled FM, FF, MM, or MF Style Breast Implants, and have not undergone implant removal with or without replacement surgery
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Andrew Schumacher | Allergan | Study Chair |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laurence Berkowitz | Campbell | California | 95008 | United States | ||
| Roy Hong |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Augmentation | Women who had breast augmentation with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
| FG001 | Revision-Augmentation | Women who had revision of a previous breast augmentation with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| 5 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
| Percentage of Participants With Reoperations | Kaplan-Meier risk rates (estimation of the percentage of participants) of reoperation is reported. | 5 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
| Percentage of Participants With Implant Removal With or Without Replacement | Kaplan-Meier risk rates (estimation of the percentage of participants) of implant removal with or without replacement | 5 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
| Palo Alto |
| California |
| 94301 |
| United States |
| Eric Bachelor | Pleasanton | California | 94566 | United States |
| Gregory Liebscher | Colorado Springs | Colorado | 80919 | United States |
| Scott Spear | Washington D.C. | District of Columbia | 20007 | United States |
| Calvin Peters | Orlando | Florida | 32801 | United States |
| Walter Erhardt | Albany | Georgia | 31701 | United States |
| James Namnoum | Atlanta | Georgia | 30342 | United States |
| Janet Turkle | Carmel | Indiana | 46032 | United States |
| Julene Samuels | Louisville | Kentucky | 40205 | United States |
| Timothy Mickel | Monroe | Louisiana | 71201 | United States |
| John Renucci | Grand Rapids | Michigan | 49503 | United States |
| Steven Morris | Midland | Michigan | 48640 | United States |
| Charles Nathan | Chesterfield | Missouri | 63005 | United States |
| Herluf Jr. Lund | Chesterfield | Missouri | 63005 | United States |
| Patricia McGuire | Creve Coeur | Missouri | 63141 | United States |
| Perry Johnson | Omaha | Nebraska | 68118 | United States |
| Peter Hyans | Berkeley Heights | New Jersey | 07922 | United States |
| Peter Hetzler | Little Silver | New Jersey | 07739 | United States |
| Caroline Glicksman | Sea Girt | New Jersey | 08750 | United States |
| Tracy Pfeifer | Great Neck | New York | 10028 | United States |
| Lloyd Gayle | New York | New York | 10021 | United States |
| Raymond Isakov | Cleveland | Ohio | 44195 | United States |
| Craig Colville | Toledo | Ohio | 43615 | United States |
| Frank Barone | Toledo | Ohio | 43623 | United States |
| Mary Gingrass | Nashville | Tennessee | 37203 | United States |
| Patrick Maxwell | Nashville | Tennessee | 37212 | United States |
| Jeffrey Friedman | Houston | Texas | 77030 | United States |
| Thomas Blanchard | Newport News | Virginia | 23606 | United States |
| FG002 | Reconstruction | Women who had breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
| FG003 | Revision-Reconstruction | Women who had revision of a previous breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
Evaluable population was defined as all screened participants who satisfied all eligibility criteria documented on the eligibility form, entered the study, and had a Year 3 office visit and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) within the window.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Augmentation | Women who had breast augmentation with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
| BG001 | Revision-Augmentation | Women who had revision of a previous breast augmentation with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
| BG002 | Reconstruction | Women who had breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
| BG003 | Revision-Reconstruction | Women who had revision of a previous breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
| BG004 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Full Range | years |
| |||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Percentage of Participants According to Investigator Satisfaction With Implants | The investigator rated their satisfaction with the participant's breast implant for each breast on a 5-point scale (1=Definitely dissatisfied, 2=Somewhat dissatisfied,3=Neither satisfied or dissatisfied, 4=Somewhat satisfied, 5=Definitely satisfied). If there was a different response for the left and right breasts the worst response was used. The percentage of participants where the investigator responded: "Definitely satisfied" or "Somewhat satisfied" is reported. | Participants from the Evaluable population, all screened participants who satisfied all eligibility criteria documented on the eligibility form, entered the study, and had a Year 3 office visit and MRI within the window, with data available for analysis. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 3 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary | Percentage of Participants According to Participant Satisfaction With Implants | The participant rated their satisfaction with the breast implant for each breast on a 5-point scale (1=Definitely dissatisfied, 2=Somewhat dissatisfied, 3=Neither satisfied or dissatisfied, 4=Somewhat satisfied, 5=Definitely satisfied). If there was a different response for the left and right breasts the worst response was used. The percentage of participants who responded: "Definitely satisfied" or "Somewhat satisfied" is reported. | Participants from the Evaluable population, all screened participants who satisfied all eligibility criteria documented on the eligibility form, entered the study, and had a Year 3 office visit and MRI within the window, with data available for analysis. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 3 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Local Complications | Kaplan-Meier risk rates (estimation of the percentage of participants) of developing local complications is presented. Local complications collected in the study were: Asymmetry, Breast Pain, Capsular contracture, Delayed wound healing, Fluid accumulation/seroma, Implant malposition, Implant palpability/visibility. Implant rupture, Infection, Ptosis, Redness, Swelling, Wrinkling/rippling and Other complications (calcifications on mammogram, thing of mastectomy flap, deformity and nipple stretching). | Evaluable population was defined as all screened participants who satisfied all eligibility criteria documented on the eligibility form, entered the study, and had a Year 3 office visit and MRI within the window. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 5 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Reoperations | Kaplan-Meier risk rates (estimation of the percentage of participants) of reoperation is reported. | Evaluable population was defined as all screened participants who satisfied all eligibility criteria documented on the eligibility form, entered the study, and had a Year 3 office visit and MRI within the window. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 5 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Implant Removal With or Without Replacement | Kaplan-Meier risk rates (estimation of the percentage of participants) of implant removal with or without replacement | Evaluable population was defined as all screened participants who satisfied all eligibility criteria documented on the eligibility form, entered the study, and had a Year 3 office visit and MRI within the window. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 5 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012) |
|
5 years (followup after implantation that occurred between 07 July 2009 and 01 January 2012)
Adverse events were not collected in this study. Deaths are reported as Serious Adverse Events. Specific local complications were collected and are reported in the Outcome Measure section. Evaluable population.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Augmentation | Women who had breast augmentation with NATRELLE® 410 implants. | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | ||
| EG001 | Reconstruction | Women who had breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. | 2 | 72 | 0 | 0 | ||
| EG002 | Revision-Augmentation | Women who had revision of a previous breast augmentation with NATRELLE® 410 implants. | 0 | 99 | 0 | 0 | ||
| EG003 | Revision-Reconstruction | Women who had revision of a previous breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. | 0 | 60 | 0 | 0 |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pulmonary embolism | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | Non-systematic Assessment | Following knee surgery |
| |
| Bacterial pneumonia | Infections and infestations | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
Not provided
A disclosure restriction on the PI is that the sponsor can review results communications prior to public release and can embargo communications regarding trial results for a period that is less than or equal to 90 days from the time submitted to the sponsor for review. The sponsor cannot require changes to the communication and cannot extend the embargo.
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Therapeutic Area, Head | Allergan | 714-246-4500 | clinicaltrials@allergan.com |
| Male |
|
| OG003 | Revision-Reconstruction | Women who had revision of a previous breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
|
|
| OG003 | Revision-Reconstruction | Women who had revision of a previous breast reconstruction with NATRELLE® 410 implants. |
|
|
|
|
|
|