Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37704858›Full record

ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2023

Technical Tips to Reduce Implant Rippling in Staged Pre-pectoral Breast Reconstruction.

Ruth Tevlin, Ayushi Dutt Sharma, Michelle Griffin, Derrick Wan, Arash Momeni

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Ruth TevlinDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 770 Welch Road, Suite 400, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA.
Ayushi Dutt SharmaDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 770 Welch Road, Suite 400, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA.
Michelle GriffinDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 770 Welch Road, Suite 400, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA.
Derrick WanDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 770 Welch Road, Suite 400, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA.
Arash MomeniDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 770 Welch Road, Suite 400, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA. amomeni@stanford.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6452-751X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) is becoming increasingly popular, permitting optimal implant positioning on the chest wall, prevention of animation deformity, and reduced patient discomfort. There are, however, concerns related to increased rates of breast implant rippling in pre-pectoral (versus submuscular) IBR, which can prompt a patient to seek revisionary surgery. The aim of this study is to identify factors that can be implemented to reduce implant rippling in the setting of pre-pectoral IBR.

methodsA literature review was conducted using the PubMed database to determine the rate of rippling in pre-pectoral IBR. Clinical studies in English were included. Further review was then performed to explore technical strategies associated with reduced rates of rippling in pre-pectoral two-stage breast reconstruction.

resultsImplant rippling has been reported with a rate varying from 0 to 53.8% in 25 studies of pre-pectoral IBR (including both direct-to-implant and two-stage IBR). The majority of studies reviewed did not demonstrate a significant association between BMI and rippling, suggesting that other factors, likely technical and device-related, contribute to the manifestation of implant rippling. Hence, we explored whether specific technical modifications could be implemented that would reduce the risk of rippling in patients undergoing pre-pectoral IBR. Specifically, we highlight the need for close attention to expansion protocol and pocket dimension, expander fill medium and implant characteristics, and the rationale behind adjunctive procedures to reduce implant rippling.

conclusionSurgical modifications may reduce the incidence of rippling in pre-pectoral breast reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: 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 ImplantsBreast NeoplasmsMammaplastyFemaleHumansReoperationRetrospective StudiesTissue Expansion DevicesTreatment OutcomeBreast implantBreast reconstructionImplant ripplingPre-pectoral reconstructionTissue expander

Identifiers

PMID37704858

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.