ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2023
It Is Time to Resolve the Dilemma and Move Away From Using Drains in Primary Breast Augmentation.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Clinical Associations and Outcomes Between Superomedial and Inferior Pedicle Breast Reduction Surgery: A Retrospective Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Article
- Aqua Breast Augmentation (ABA): Hydrodissection Breast Augmentation Technique.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Breast augmentation is one of the most commonly performed aesthetic surgical procedures, yet there has been no consensus on the use of drains. While some surgeons believe in using them due to fear of complications or because they were taught in a conventional manner, the authors present their experience of performing breast surgery without the use of drains. Objectives: To study whether performing breast augmentation without the use of drains is safe. Methods: Anthropometric details and complications of all the consecutive primary breast augmentation patients performed by a single surgeon from 2009 to 2022 were collected and analyzed. In none of these patients, drains were used. Results: A total of 429 (21%) patients were lost to follow-up and only those 1617 patients with a minimum follow-up of 6 months were included in this study. The mean age of the study group was 29.8 years with a mean BMI of 24.68. Mean follow-up was 16.24 months. Hematoma occurred in 15 patients (0.92%), seroma in 12 (0.74%), explantation due to infection in 3 patients (0.18%), and capsular contracture in 44 patients (2.72%). All these complications were in the lower range of complications of breast augmentation reported in the literature. Conclusions: Unwarranted use of drains in breast augmentation should be avoided as it does not seemingly prevent the complications of breast augmentation surgery. Instead, it may increase the chances of infection, pain, and discomfort, and prolong the antibiotic coverage, and hence put an additional overall financial burden on the patient. Level of Evidence 4:
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.