Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34915566›Full record

ArticleAesthetic surgery journal2022

Impact of Capsulectomy Type on Post-Explantation Systemic Symptom Improvement: Findings From the ASERF Systemic Symptoms in Women-Biospecimen Analysis Study: Part 1.

Caroline Glicksman, Patricia McGuire, Marshall Kadin, Marisa Lawrence, Melinda Haws, Jill Newby, Sarah Ferenz, James Sung, Roger Wixtrom

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Revision Mastopexy in Aesthetic Breast Surgery.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Caroline GlicksmanHackensack Meridian School of Medicine, Nutley, NJ, USA.
Patricia McGuireWashington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Marshall KadinDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Marisa Lawrence
Melinda HawsDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Jill NewbySchool of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Sarah FerenzChicago Medical School, North Chicago, IL, USA.
James SungDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Roger Wixtrom
Brown University · USCenter for Discovery · USRosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science · USUNSW Sydney · AUVanderbilt University · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast Implant Illness (BII) is a term used to describe a variety of symptoms by patients with breast implants for which there are no abnormal physical or laboratory findings to explain their symptoms. There currently exists a difference of opinion among clinicians and patients concerning the diagnosis and treatment of patients self-reporting BII.

objectivesThe first aim of this study was to determine if there is a valid indication for "en bloc" capsulectomy in patients self-reporting BII and if the type of capsulectomy performed alters long-term symptom improvement. The second goal was to identify any clinical laboratory differences between the cohorts. This study was funded by the Aesthetic Surgery Education and Research Foundation (ASERF).

methodsA prospective blinded study enrolled 150 consecutive subjects divided equally into 3 cohorts: (A) women with systemic symptoms they attribute to their implants who requested implant removal; (B) women with breast implants requesting removal or exchange who do not have symptoms they attribute to their implants; and (C) women undergoing cosmetic mastopexy who have never had any implanted medical device. The subject's baseline demographic data and a systemic symptoms survey, including PROMIS validated questionnaires, was obtained before surgery and at 3-6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Blood was collected from all 3 cohorts and implant capsules were collected from Cohorts A and B.

results150 patients were enrolled between 2019-2021. Follow-up at 3-6 weeks for all 3 cohorts was between 98%-100%, 78%-98% at 6-months, and 1 year data is currently at 80%. The type of capsulectomy; intact total, total, or partial all showed similar symptom improvement with no statistical difference in the reduction of symptoms based on the type of capsulectomy.

conclusionsThis study addresses one of the most discussed questions by plastic surgeons, patients, their advocates, and social media. The findings show that patients who self-report BII demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in their symptoms after explantation and that this improvement persists for at least 6 months. This improvement in self-reported systemic symptoms was seen regardless of the type of capsulectomy performed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2:

Indexed as

Breast ImplantationBreast ImplantsDevice RemovalFemaleHumansProspective StudiesReoperation

Identifiers

PMID34915566
PMCPMC9208825
OpenAlexW4200202662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.