Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29346485›Full record

ArticleJAMA facial plastic surgery2018

Adverse Events in Facial Implant Surgery and Associated Malpractice Litigation.

Hani M Rayess, Peter Svider, Curtis Hanba, Vivek Sagar Patel, Michael Carron, Giancarlo Zuliani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA facial plastic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Hani M RayessDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.
Peter SviderDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.
Curtis HanbaDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.
Vivek Sagar PatelFacial Plastic Surgery Associates, Houston, Texas.
Michael CarronDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.
Giancarlo ZulianiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceFacial implants represent an important strategy for providing instant and long-lasting volume enhancement to address both aging and posttraumatic defects.

objectiveTo better understand risks of facial implants by examining national resources encompassing adverse events and considerations facilitating associated litigation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsA cross-sectional study reviewed complications following facial implants. The procedures reviewed were performed on patients at locations throughout the United States from January 2006 to December 2016. Data collection was completed in March 2017. The Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database, which contains medical device reports submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), was searched for complications that occurred from January 2006 to December 2016 involving facial implants made by Implantech, MEDPOR, Stryker, KLS Martin, and Synthes. Furthermore, the Thomson Reuters Westlaw legal database was searched for relevant litigation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The complications of facial implants were analyzed in relation to the location of implant and severity of complication. Litigation was analyzed to determine which factors determine outcome.

resultsThirty-nine instances of adverse events reported to the FDA were identified. Sixteen (41%) involved malar implants, followed by 12 chin implants (31%). The most common complications included infection (18 [46%]), implant migration (9 [23%]), swelling (7 [18%]), and extrusion (4 [10%]). Thirty-two patients (83%) had to have their implants removed. Infection occurred at a mean (SD) of 83.3 (68.8) days following the surgery. One-third of complications involved either migration or extrusion. The mean (range) time to migration or extrusion was 381.1 (10-2400) days. In 12 malpractice cases identified in publicly available court proceedings, alleged inadequate informed consent and requiring additional surgical intervention (ie, removal) were the most commonly cited factors. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Infection and implant migration or extrusion are the most common complications of facial implants. Most of these complications necessitate removal. These considerations need to be discussed with patients preoperatively as part of the informed consent process, as allegedly inadequate informed consent was cited in a significant proportion of resultant litigation, and there were overlapping considerations among adverse events reported to the FDA and factors brought up in relevant litigation. Cases resolved with settlements and jury-awarded damages encompassed considerable award totals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.

Indexed as

Postoperative ComplicationsCompensation and RedressCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualDevice RemovalFaceFemaleHumansInformed ConsentMaleMalpracticeMaxillofacial ProsthesisUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug Administration

Identifiers

PMID29346485
PMCPMC5876842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.