ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2024
The Problem of Diagnostic Criteria of Breast Implant Illness in Women After Breast Reconstruction: Review and Discussion of a Case.
Review in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-Reported Symptom Changes Following Breast Implant Explantation with Total Capsulectomy: A Prospective Case Series of 50 Patients.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere has been a rising trend in the use of silicone breast implants for breast reconstructions after breast cancer treatment, as well as in the aesthetic breast procedures. A cluster of non-specific symptoms related to the presence of silicone implant has been called breast implant illness (BII). However, there are no strict criteria of BII which would specifically define this term. The increasing interest in BII among patients and physicians urges verifying own cases of "on-demand" explantations. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this paper, we discussed a case of a patient with initial BII diagnosis, after breast reconstruction, and reviewed the literature on the BII symptoms and aetiology. A decision for aesthetic revision, not explantation, was made as the diagnosis of BII was questioned, and somatisation due to dissatisfaction with the aesthetic result of breast reconstruction was diagnosed.
resultsImproving aesthetics by implant exchange and contralateral mastopexy caused a full recovery from patient's symptoms.
conclusionBased on our case, we point on the fact that BII diagnosis in patients after breast reconstruction is challenging. We suggest that while considering such a diagnosis and further proceedings, e.g. explantation, especially in patients after breast reconstruction, some exclusion criteria should be considered. Dissatisfaction with the result of the surgery can also lead to somatisation and the presence of real clinical symptoms, which should not be confused with the possible autoimmune reaction to silicone particles. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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
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.