A comparative assessment of three planes of implant placement in breast augmentation: A Bayesian analysis

Shen, Zeren; Chen, Xi; Sun, Jiaqi; Chiu, Chiaoyun; Yu, Yijia; Lin, Xiaohu; Zhang, Zhe; Xu, Jinghong

doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2019.09.010

Cited by 19 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After completing both stages of screening, 22 (0.82%) studies were included for analysis. 10-31 Cohen’s kappa was found to be 0.814 at title/abstract screening, which indicates almost perfect agreement between the 2 reviewers and strong interrater reliability.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Evaluating the Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses About Breast Augmentation Using AMSTAR

Yuan

Austin

et al. 2021

Aesthetic Surgery Journal Open Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Breast augmentation is one of the most commonly performed cosmetic surgeries worldwide. Therefore, it is imperative to have evidence with high methodological quality to guide clinical decision making. Objectives To evaluate the methodological quality of the systematic reviews (SRs) focused on breast augmentation. Methods: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews was performed. SRs that have a particular focus on breast augmentation and were published in the top 15 plastic and reconstructive surgery journals were included. Quality assessment was performed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Study characteristics were extracted including journal and impact factor, year of publication, country affiliation of corresponding author, reporting adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, number of citations, and number of studies included. Results Among the 22 studies included for analysis, the mean AMSTAR score was moderate (5.55), with no SR achieving good quality (AMSTAR score ≥9). There were no significant associations between AMSTAR score and journal impact factor, number of citations, year of publication, or number of included studies. Studies that reported adherence to PRISMA guidelines on average scored higher on the AMSTAR tool (p=0.03). Conclusions The methodological quality of reviews about breast augmentation was found to be moderate, with no significant increase in studies or quality over time. Adherence to PRISMA guidelines and increased appraisal of SRs about breast augmentation using methodological assessment tools would further strengthen methodological quality and confidence in study findings.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Evaluating the Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses About Breast Augmentation Using AMSTAR

Yuan

Austin

et al. 2021

Aesthetic Surgery Journal Open Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the process of implant augmentation mammoplasty can be perceived as an invasive procedure by prospective patients. In addition, an unnatural appearance and texture, malposition, asymmetry, nipple numbness, scarring, contracture, hematoma, seroma, infection, and the possibility of implant rupture are risks of implant augmentation mammoplasty [5]. For these reasons, injecting autologous fat or filler substances into the breast emerged as a simple alternative technique for breast augmentation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delayed purulent infected breast after a large-volume Aquafilling filler injection in an HIV-positive transgender patient: a case report

Kim¹,

Kim²,

Sun³

et al. 2022

Arch Aesthetic Plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Known to be chemically inert, Aquafilling filler has been widely used in local aesthetic clinics in South Korea for breast augmentation. However, Aquafilling is only approved as a dermal filler and is not approved as an injectable filler for breast augmentation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. Several reports of complications following large-volume Aquafilling injections in the breast have been published. In this study, an HIV (human immunodeficiency virus)-infected transgender patient presented to the emergency room with a purulent infection of the breast and systemic fever. The patient had a history of large-volume Aquafilling injection in both breasts 3 years earlier to obtain a feminized appearance of the breasts. After using intravenous antibiotics and performing several surgical debridements over 4 weeks, the overall inflammatory response subsided. The skin defect site was covered successfully using an Integra Wound Matrix Dressing and there were no recurrent complications over 2 years of follow-up visits. Before injecting Aquafilling to augment patients’ breasts, a thorough consultation is mandatory, and doctors must notify patients that the risk of complications may be relatively high. Furthermore, any fillers including Aquafilling must not be used for unapproved purposes.

show abstract

“…The most recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews of the literature show that 1.9% of patients with submuscular implants and 9.6% of patients with subglandular implants develop capsular fibrosis. 4,6 In contrast, during breast reconstruction submuscular implant poses a greater risk of capsular contracture, affecting up to 8.7% of patients with prepectoral reconstruction with ADM and up to 13.9% of patients with subpectoral reconstruction. 5,6 Intraoperative maneuvers and manipulation of the breast implant can also reduce the risk of capsular contracture by utilizing the "14-point plan.…”

Section: Surgical Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 In breast augmentation, capsular contracture affects 1.9% of patients with submuscular implants and 9.6% of patients with subglandular implants; in breast reconstruction capsular contracture affects up to 8.7% of patients with prepectoral reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and up to 13.9% of patients with subpectoral implants. [3][4][5][6][7] These numbers increase substantially in radiated patients, with up to 40% of patients receiving post-mastectomy radiotherapy suffering from capsular contracture. 3 Despite the high incidence of capsular contracture, an effective treatment remains elusive with up to 54% of surgically managed capsular contracture cases recurring.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Current Concepts in Capsular Contracture: Pathophysiology, Prevention, and Management

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over 400,000 women in the United States alone will have breast implant surgery each year. Although capsular contracture represents the most common complication of breast implant surgery, surgeons continue to debate the precise etiology. General agreement exists concerning the inflammatory origin of capsular fibrosis, but the inciting events triggering the inflammatory cascade appear to be multifactorial, making it difficult to predict why one patient may develop capsular contracture while another will not. Accordingly, researchers have explored many different surgical, biomaterial, and medical therapies to address these multiple factors in an attempt to prevent and treat capsular contracture. In the current paper, we aim to inform the reader on the most up-to-date understanding of the pathophysiology, prevention, and treatment of capsular contracture.

show abstract

A comparative assessment of three planes of implant placement in breast augmentation: A Bayesian analysis

Cited by 19 publications

References 55 publications

Evaluating the Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses About Breast Augmentation Using AMSTAR

Evaluating the Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses About Breast Augmentation Using AMSTAR

Delayed purulent infected breast after a large-volume Aquafilling filler injection in an HIV-positive transgender patient: a case report

Current Concepts in Capsular Contracture: Pathophysiology, Prevention, and Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About