SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2023
Postoperative Complications Following Prepectoral Versus Partial Subpectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using ADM: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prepectoral and partial subpectoral immediate single-stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using ADM.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Complications After Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction in Patients Receiving Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- The use of porcine acellular dermal matrices in implant-based breast reconstruction: A systematic literature review.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- Practice patterns in prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: A survey of UK plastic surgeons.JPRAS open · 2026Article
- Comparison of Secondary Procedures and Complications Between Subpectoral and Prepectoral Direct-to-implant-based Breast Reconstruction: 5-year Retrospective Analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Prepectoral versus Retropectoral Direct to Implant Breast Reconstruction after Skin-reducing Mastectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Machine Learning to Predict Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Failure: A Bootstrap-Validated Elastic Net Model.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of different implant-based breast reconstruction strategies: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Capsular Contracture in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Comprehensive Narrative Review of Pathophysiology, Risk Factors, and Contemporary Controversies.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Hot Topics in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Considering Factors for Deciding Between Subpectoral and Prepectoral Planes in Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The role of bovine pericardium matrix in immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction: Insights from the largest published retrospective series.JPRAS open · 2025Article
- Dynamic Contour Irregularities in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Long-Term Aesthetic Outcomes After Direct-to-Implant Versus Tissue Expander Techniques.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Does Size Matter? Exploring the Impact of Acellular Dermal Matrix Dimensions on Complications in Immediate Breast Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Patient-reported outcomes 3 and 18 months after mastectomy and immediate prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction in the UK Pre-BRA prospective multicentre cohort study.The British journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Current status of pre- and retropectoral breast reconstructions worldwide: a narrative review.Gland surgery · 2024Review
- Postoperative Outcomes of Pre-Pectoral Versus Sub-Pectoral Implant Immediate Breast Reconstruction.Cancers · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is a paucity of evidence comparing the safety of prepectoral and partial subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrices (ADM). We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the postoperative complications of the two approaches.
methodsPubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched to retrieve relevant articles. The rates of the complications were, respectively, pooled, and relative risk (RR) was estimated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to compare the incidence between the two cohorts.
resultsTen articles reporting on 2667 breast reconstructions were eligible. The hematoma rate was lower in the prepectoral group (RR = 0.590, 95% CI 0.351-0.992). No significant difference was observed in terms of seroma (RR = 1.079, 95% CI 0.489-2.381), skin flap necrosis (RR = 0.936, 95% CI 0.587-1.493), infection (RR = 0.985, 95% CI 0.706-1.375), tissue expander/implant explantation (RR = 0.741, 95% CI 0.506-1.085), wound dehiscence (RR = 1.272, 95% CI 0.605-2.673), capsular contracture (RR = 0.939, 95% CI 0.678-1.300) and rippling (RR = 2.485, 95% CI 0.986-6.261). The RR of animation deformity for the prepectoral group compared with the subpectoral group was 0.040 (95% CI, 0.002-0.853).
conclusionsThis systematic review suggested that with appropriate patient selection, prepectoral breast reconstruction could avoid animation deformity without incurring higher risk of early wound complications, capsular contracture or rippling than partial subpectoral breast reconstruction. Plastic surgeons should complete a comprehensive assessment of the patients before choosing appropriate surgical approaches in clinical practice. 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
Identifiers
36947180What 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.