Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33836057›Full record

SynthesisAesthetic surgery journal2022

Implants and Breast Pocket Irrigation: Outcomes of Antibiotic, Antiseptic, and Saline Irrigation.

Amanda N Awad, Adee J Heiman, Ashit Patel

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amanda N AwadAlbany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1192-8408
Adee J HeimanDivision of Plastic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0429-4953
Ashit PatelDivision of Plastic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8384-190X
Albany Medical Center Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast implant-associated infection and capsular contracture are challenging complications that can result in poor outcomes following implant-based breast surgery. Antimicrobial irrigation of the breast pocket or implant is a widely accepted strategy to prevent these complications, but the literature lacks an evidence-based consensus on the optimal irrigation solution.

objectivesThe objective of this systematic review was to compare clinical outcomes, specifically capsular contracture, infection, and reoperation rates, associated with the use of antibiotic, antiseptic, and saline irrigation.

methodsA systematic review was performed in March 2020 based on the following search terms: "breast implant," "irrigation," "antibiotic," "bacitracin," "antiseptic," "povidone iodine," "betadine," "low concentration chlorhexidine," and "hypochlorous acid." Capsular contracture, infection, and reoperation rates were compared by analysis of forest plots.

resultsOut of the 104 articles screened, 14 met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in capsular contracture rates between antibiotic and povidone-iodine irrigation, although the data comparing these 2 groups were limited and confounded by the concurrent use of steroids. Antibiotic irrigation showed a significantly lower rate of capsular contracture compared with saline irrigation and a lower rate of capsular contracture and reoperation compared with no irrigation at all. Povidone-iodine was associated with lower rates of capsular contracture and reoperation compared with saline irrigation but there were no data on infection rates specific to povidone-iodine irrigation.

conclusionsOur study supports the use of antibiotics or povidone-iodine for breast implant irrigation. Further research is required to better determine which of these 2 irrigation types is superior. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, LocalBreast ImplantationBreast ImplantsAnti-Bacterial AgentsHumansImplant Capsular ContracturePovidone-IodineTherapeutic IrrigationAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective Agents, LocalPovidone-Iodine

Identifiers

PMID33836057
OpenAlexW3144769553

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.