ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2020
Complication Rate of Prepectoral Implant-based Breast Reconstruction Using Human Acellular Dermal Matrices.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Direct-to-Implant Subcutaneous Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Complications and Patient's Quality of Life.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Letter in Reply to Comment on: "Pocket Conversion from Prepectoral to Retropectoral Implant Placement in Breast Reconstruction: A Cost-effective Solution for High-Grade Rippling and Implant Visibility".Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Technical feasibility of hand-meshed autologous dermal grafts in immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction: a preliminary case series.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Ergonomic Implants: A Single Centre Experience in Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
- Pocket Conversion from Prepectoral to Retropectoral Implant Placement in Breast Reconstruction: A Cost-effective Solution for High-Grade Rippling and Implant Visibility.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Preliminary study for developing a fully biological breast implant.JPRAS open · 2025Article
- Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate mesh (GalaFlex®) in aesthetic breast surgery: A comprehensive systematic review.JPRAS open · 2025Review
- Prepectoral breast reconstruction with and without acellular dermal matrix: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Optimizing Aesthetic Results in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Patient Factors, Surgical Techniques, and Adjunctive Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Reverse Submammary Adipofascial Perforator Flap: Preliminary Results of a Dual-plane, Acellular Dermal Matrix-free, Direct-to-implant Hybrid Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Revisiting low complications of VICRYL mesh in breast reconstruction: Insights from an updated systematic review.JPRAS open · 2025Review
- Does the Omission of Cefazolin in Irrigation Solution Affect Outcomes in Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction?Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Article
- Application of pectoralis major fascia in retropectoral breast reconstruction: the five-step method.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Immediate Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrices: Preliminary Results.Plastic surgery (Oakville, Ont.) · 2024Article
- The Impact of Breast Implant Cohesivity on Rippling and Revision Procedures in 2-Stage Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2024Article
- The Effect of Early Cultures and Dual-port Expanders on Two-stage, Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: The 25/25 Study.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- A Cohort Analysis of Early Outcomes After AlloDerm, FlexHD, and SurgiMend Use in Two-Stage Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2023Article
- Literature review and guide for optimal position in implant-based breast reconstruction.Gland surgery · 2023Review
- Acellular dermal matrix in reconstructive surgery: Applications, benefits, and cost.Frontiers in transplantation · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) is currently the most frequently performed reconstructive technique post mastectomy. Even though submuscular IBR continues to be the most commonly used technique, mastectomy technique optimization, the possibility to check skin viability with indocyanine green angiography, the enhanced propensity of patients undergoing prophylactic mastectomies, and the introduction of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) have paved the way to the rediscovery of the subcutaneous reconstruction technique. The aim of this article is to update the complication rate of immediate and delayed prepectoral IBR using human ADMs (hADMs).
methodsA literature search, using PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, and Google Scholar database according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, was conducted to evaluate complication rates of prepectoral implant-based reconstructions using hADMs. The following MeSH terms were used: "prepectoral breast reconstruction acellular dermal matrix," "prepectoral breast reconstruction ADM," "human ADM breast reconstruction," and "human acellular dermal matrix breast reconstruction" (period: 2005-2020; the last search took place on April 2, 2020).
resultsThis meta-analysis includes 1425 patients (2270 breasts) who had undergone immediate or delayed prepectoral IBR using different types of hADMs. The overall complication rate amounted to 19%. The most frequent complication was represented by infection (7.9%), followed by seroma (4.8%), mastectomy flap necrosis (3.4%), and implant loss (2.8%).
conclusionsThe overall complication rate was 19%. The most frequent complications were infection, seroma, and mastectomy flap necrosis, while capsular contracture was rare.
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.