SynthesisPloS one2015
Comparison of the postoperative incidence rate of capsular contracture among different breast implants: a cumulative meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.
- Capsular Contracture Rates in Subfascial and Subglandular Breast Augmentation With Smooth vs Textured Implants.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2026Pooled it
- Round Versus Anatomical Implants in Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- A Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis of 35,052 Smooth vs Textured Implants in Breast Reconstruction and Augmentation.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparison of revision surgery after implant-based breast reconstruction between smooth, textured, and polyurethane-covered implants: results from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry.The British journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Capsular Contracture After Breast Augmentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2025Review
- Management of complications following implant-based breast reconstruction: a narrative review.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Review
- What Can We Learn from Breast Implant Explantation: a 28-Year, Multicenter Retrospective Study of 1004 Explantation Cases.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2023Article
- The Role of Microorganisms in the Development of Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of Breast Cancer: Update 2022.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2022Article
- Advanced strategies to thwart foreign body response to implantable devices.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2022Review
- Invited Discussion on: Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Concentration on the Skin After Preoperative Surgical Site Preparation in Breast Surgery-A Randomized Controlled Trial.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2022Article
- Environmental, Microbiological, and Immunological Features of Bacterial Biofilms Associated with Implanted Medical Devices.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2022Review
- Asiaticoside Combined With Carbon Ion Implantation to Improve the Biocompatibility of Silicone Rubber and to Reduce the Risk of Capsule Contracture.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Article
- Early onset of capsular contracture after breast augmentation with implant: report of two cases & review of literature.Case reports in plastic surgery & hand surgery · 2022Article
- Suppression of the fibrotic encapsulation of silicone implants by inhibiting the mechanical activation of pro-fibrotic TGF-β.Nature biomedical engineering · 2021Article
- Comparison Of Endoscopic Transaxillary And Peri-areolar Approaches In Breast Augmentation With Smooth Implants.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2021Article
- Physics and Physiology of Cell Spreading in Two and Three Dimensions.Physiology (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- Implant Fibrosis and the Underappreciated Role of Myofibroblasts in the Foreign Body Reaction.Cells · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA large number of clinical studies have reported that the different materials used in breast implants were a possible cause of the different incidence rates of capsular contracture observed in patients after implantation. However, this theory lacks comprehensive support from evidence-based medicine, and considerable controversy remains.
objectivesIn this study, a cumulative systematic review examined breast augmentation that used implants with textured or smooth surfaces to analyze the effects of these two types of implants on the occurrence of postoperative capsular contracture.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of literature databases, including PubMed and EMBASE, for clinical reports on the incidence of capsular contracture after the implantation of breast prostheses. We performed a cumulative meta-analysis on the incidence of capsular contracture in order from small to large sample sizes and conducted subgroup analyses according to the prosthetic material used, the implant pocket placement, the incision type and the duration of follow-up. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as the final pooled statistics.
resultsThis meta-analysis included 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and two retrospective studies. The cumulative comparison of textured and smooth breast implants showed statistical significance at 2.13 (95% CI, 1.18-3.86) when the fourth study was entered into the analysis. With the inclusion of more reports, the final results indicated that smooth breast implants were more likely to be associated with capsular contracture, with statistical significance at 3.10 (95% CI, 2.23-4.33). In the subgroup analyses, the subgroups based on implant materials included the silicone implant group and the saline implant group, with significant pooled statistical levels of 4.05 (95% CI, 1.97-8.31) and 3.12 (95% CI, 2.19-4.42), respectively. According to implant pocket placement, a subglandular group and a submuscular group were included in the analyses, and only the subglandular group had a statistically significant pooled result of 3.59 (95% CI, 2.43-5.30). Four subgroups were included in the analyses according to incision type: the inframammary incision group, the periareolar incision group, the transaxillary incision group and the mastectomy incision group. Among these groups, only the pooled results of the inframammary and mastectomy incision groups were statistically significant, at 2.82 (95% CI, 1.30-6.11) and 2.30 (95% CI, 1.17-4.50), respectively. Three follow-up duration subgroups were included in the analyses: the one-year group, the two- to three-year group and the ≥ five-year group. These subgroups had statistically significant results of 4.67 (95% CI, 2.35-9.28), 3.42 (95% CI, 2.26-5.16) and 2.71 (95% CI, 1.64-4.49), respectively.
conclusionIn mammaplasty, the use of textured implants reduces the incidence of postoperative capsular contracture. Differences in implant pocket placement and incision type are also likely to affect the incidence of capsular contracture; however, this conclusion awaits further study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.