SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Complications of Superomedial Versus Inferior Pedicle Reduction Mammaplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes and Complications of Mobile Inferior Pedicle Breast Reduction as a Modification of Inferior Pedicle.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Risk Factors for Postoperative Complications After Superomedial Pedicle Reduction Mammaplasty.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
- Beyond the T-junction: Reinforce strategic sites in superomedial pedicle mammoplasties using a dual dermal flap technique.JPRAS open · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe superomedial pedicle reduction mammoplasty has gained popularity and is an important alternative approach for reduction mammoplasty, while the inferior pedicle reduction mammaplasty remains by far the most performed as it is considered to provide the best vascularization to the nipple-areola complex, allowing safe removal of large amount of redundant tissue. The authors conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis in an attempt to declare the differences of the superomedial pedicle versus the inferior pedicle reduction technique by comparing the postoperative complications.
methodsPubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library for clinical studies were queried from inception to January 1, 2024. Review Manager Version 5.4 was used for this meta-analysis. A random effects model was applied to OR, and 95%CI were determined using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The I
resultsTwelve observational comparative studies were included. The superomedial pedicle technique had a statistically lower rate of overall complications (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47-0.75; p < 0.0001) and delayed wound healing (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.33-0.64; p < 0.00001) than the inferior pedicle technique. No significant differences in wound dehiscence, infection, seroma, hematoma, skin necrosis, fat necrosis, NAC necrosis, nipple sensation decrease or loss, asymmetry, hypertrophic scarring, and reoperation were noted.
conclusionsBoth two techniques are equally safe and reliable, while the superomedial pedicle technique resulted in a statistically lower rate of overall complications and delayed wound healing. 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
38997426What 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.