ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Surgical Trauma Comparison of Inframammary Fold versus Endoscopic Transaxillary Approaches in Breast Augmentation: A 7-Year Cohort Study.
Article 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 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.
- Do Cultural Preferences Shape Our Choice of Breast Augmentation Approach?Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- The Sociocultural Impact of Smartphone-Based 3D Facial Scanning in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery: Ethical Considerations and Accessibility.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis retrospective cohort study aimed to assess differences in surgical trauma between the inframammary fold approach and endoscopic transaxillary approach in breast augmentation surgery.
methodsOne hundred and ninety-four patients who underwent breast augmentation using either an inframammary fold or endoscopic transaxillary approach were enrolled. All procedures were primary and bilateral cases. Patients' demographics and indicators, such as operation duration, postoperative volume of drainage, drainage duration, length of hospital stay, and postoperative pain scores, were observed and analyzed.
resultsOne hundred and five patients underwent inframammary fold incisions, while the remaining 89 received transaxillary incisions. The operation duration was significantly shorter in the inframammary fold group than in the transaxillary group, while the VAS scores were significantly lower (p < 0.001). Similarly, differences in the age and fertility status between the two groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05). However, no statistically significant differences were noted in the scores of the remaining indicators (p < 0.05).
conclusionsThis research demonstrated that while patients in the endoscopic transaxillary group were typically younger, which is commonly hypothesized to result in superior results, the inframammary fold approach may offer a surgical option with reduced trauma and pain and concomitantly greater convenience and efficiency, yielding high satisfaction levels among Chinese women. 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
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.