ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery2025
One-Year Outcomes in Prepectoral versus Subpectoral Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short-term Outcomes of Polydioxanone Synthetic Mesh in 2-stage Breast Reconstruction: A Single-Center Comparative Study.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2026Article
- Comparison of Secondary Procedures and Complications Between Subpectoral and Prepectoral Direct-to-implant-based Breast Reconstruction: 5-year Retrospective Analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- The Role of Indocyanine Green Angiography and Axillary Reverse Mapping in Breast Reconstruction Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Revisiting Total Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction: Technical Refinements for Improved Outcomes.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
- Breast reconstruction-related complications from postmastectomy radiation therapy in stage II-III breast cancer: sub-analysis of a multi-institutional observational study (Reborn-03).Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrepectoral and subpectoral approaches to implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) are both reliable options after mastectomy. In this study, the authors compared 1-year complication rates, additional or revision procedures, and patient-reported outcomes between 2-stage prepectoral or subpectoral IBBR through propensity matching.
methodsFemale patients who underwent prepectoral or subpectoral 2-stage IBBR from January of 2017 to June of 2022 with BREAST-Q scores available 1 year after exchange were reviewed. Complication rates, additional or revision procedures at the time of exchange and within 1 year of exchange, and BREAST-Q scores preoperatively and at 1 year were compared between patient groups. Propensity score-matched analyses were used to reduce possible confounding or selection bias related to nonrandomized treatment assignment of patients.
resultsOf 1732 overall patients, 878 patients were included in the matched analysis (439 in each cohort). Patients with prepectoral IBBR had significantly higher rates of implant-related cellulitis or infection (5.5% versus 1.8%; P = 0.008) and implant exposure (2.3% versus 0.2%; P = 0.016) compared with patients with subpectoral IBBR, and more commonly had fat grafting at the time of the exchange procedure. On BREAST-Q, Physical Well-Being of the Chest at 1 year was significantly higher in the patients with prepectoral IBBR (median, 80 [interquartile range, 64, 92] versus 76 [64, 85]; P < 0.001). No other differences in BREAST-Q outcomes were observed.
conclusionIn this powered analysis comparing prepectoral and subpectoral implant reconstruction at 1 year, the authors found that patients with prepectoral IBBR experienced higher rates of complications, such as infection or implant exposure, after implant exchange but had improved health-related quality of life as defined by the BREAST-Q Physical Well-Being of the Chest domain. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
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.