Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33864116›Full record

ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2021

Hematoma After Non-Oncologic Breast Procedures: A Comprehensive Review of the Evidence.

David A Daar, Jonathan M Bekisz, Michael V Chiodo, Evellyn M DeMitchell-Rodriguez, Pierre B Saadeh

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Imaging of the Reconstructed Breast.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  11. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

David A DaarHansjörg Wyss Department of Plastic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, 222 East 41st Street, New York, NY, 10017, USA. David.Daar@nyulangone.org.
Jonathan M BekiszHansjörg Wyss Department of Plastic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, 222 East 41st Street, New York, NY, 10017, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3125-1753
Michael V ChiodoHansjörg Wyss Department of Plastic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, 222 East 41st Street, New York, NY, 10017, USA.
Evellyn M DeMitchell-RodriguezHansjörg Wyss Department of Plastic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, 222 East 41st Street, New York, NY, 10017, USA.
Pierre B SaadehHansjörg Wyss Department of Plastic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, 222 East 41st Street, New York, NY, 10017, USA.
NYU Langone Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHematoma after non-oncologic breast surgery is a common concern requiring expeditious treatment. The purpose of this study is to perform an evidence-based review of perioperative factors that may contribute to hematoma in non-oncologic breast procedures.

methodsA comprehensive literature review was performed of non-oncologic breast procedures: breast augmentation, single-stage augmentation-mastopexy, mastopexy, and reduction. In total, 28 studies highlighting incidence and potential risk factors for hematoma were included; overall level of evidence was established regarding each perioperative factor examined and hematoma rate.

resultsThe hematoma rate in breast augmentation ranges from 0.2 to 5.7%. There is inconclusive evidence to support an association between pocket choice or incision location and hematoma rate (Level III) and no evidence of an association between implant type and hematoma (Level V). Single-stage augmentation-mastopexy may have a lower hematoma rate than augmentation alone (Level II). Hematoma may increase the risk of capsular contracture (Level III). In breast reduction, the hematoma rate ranges from 1.0 to 9.3%. Evidence of an association between incision choice and hematoma rate is inconclusive (Level III). Use of epinephrine-containing solution, pedicle choice, and resection weight do not appear to affect hematoma rate (Level V, II, and II, respectively). The use of postoperative drains and ketorolac do not affect the incidence of hematoma (Level I and III, respectively). Intraoperative hypotension may increase the risk of hematoma after breast reduction (Level III).

conclusionsBreast hematomas are not uncommon complications. Current literature lacks ample evidence for risk factors for hematoma after non-oncologic breast procedures, warranting further, high-powered investigations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Indexed as

Breast ImplantationBreast ImplantsMammaplastyEstheticsHematomaHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAugmentation-mastopexyBreast augmentationBreast reductionMastopexy hematomaOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID33864116
OpenAlexW3155853819

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.