ArticleAesthetic surgery journal2023
Polydioxanone Monofilament Mesh: A Safety Net for Complex Breast Implant Revision Surgery.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short-term Outcomes of Polydioxanone Synthetic Mesh in 2-stage Breast Reconstruction: A Single-Center Comparative Study.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2026Article
- Early Experience with Synthetic Monofilament Polydioxanone Mesh in Primary Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Matched Analysis.Archives of plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Early Use and Outcomes of Polydioxanone Mesh in Implant-based Breast Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence, Genuine Outcome: Analysis of 72 Consecutive Cases of Subfascial Augmentation Mastopexy With Smooth Round Implants Supported by P4HB Scaffold.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2024Article
- Soft Tissue Support as an Adjunct to Implant-Based Cosmetic Breast Surgery: A 500+ Case Experience.Eplasty · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast revision surgeries are complex cases requiring greater pocket control than primary surgeries. Intraoperative techniques to maximize pocket integrity are crucial to achieving an aesthetic result in revisions with implants.
objectivesUniform utilization of a polydioxanone (PDO) internal support matrix in a high volume of revision-augmentation cases has, to our knowledge, never before been described.
methodsA high-volume (n = 104) single-surgeon experience followed patient outcomes in consecutive cases from September 2020 to March 2022. Included in this cohort were patients undergoing revision-augmentations with vertical or wise-pattern mastopexies (n = 74), revision-augmentation without mastopexies (n = 25), and revision without implant exchange (n = 5). Each case employed at least 1 sheet of PDO mesh, with a small set (n = 4) receiving 2 sheets. Patients were followed up (range, 3-19 months), with 3 months minimum follow-up to assess outcomes.
resultsThe average length of follow-up was 8.8 months. Patients in this cohort had undergone an average of 1.6 prior breast surgeries (range, 1-7). A total 89.4% of patients received an increase in implant volume (average change, +165.2 Cc); 87.5% of patients had favourable aesthetic outcomes, and 12.5% of patients were reoperated on (including reoperations for complications and/or aesthetic reasons). There were 13 complications in the cohort, and no mesh-related complications.
conclusionsPDO mesh is a safe and effective method of increasing pocket control in breast revision. Supplemental soft-tissue support allowed greater implant volumes to be employed, yielding high rates of patient satisfaction with breast shape, scarring, and long-term aesthetics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:
Indexed as
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.