ReviewCureus2025
Short-Term Outcomes and Cosmetic Results of Pre-pectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using Braxon® Mesh: A Systematic Review of Post-operative Complications.
Review in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Enhancing Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant Reconstruction Using the Serratus Anterior Fascia: The Hybrid Plane.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The technique of implant immediate breast reconstruction has been revived since the advent of acellular dermal matrices (ADM). The traditional technique involving sub-pectoral implant placement is being replaced by the re-emerging technique of muscle-sparing pre-pectoral implant placement due to the availability of ADM, which can wrapped around the implant, thereby obviating the need for any additional tissue cover. Braxon® (DECO Med s.r.l., Marcon, Italy), a novel ADM, specifically designed for breast reconstruction, is gaining popularity among surgeons in the UK and Europe. Its early outcomes seem promising; however, the literature to back its utility is still scarce. Hence, there is a need to gather and compile the existing evidence to inform the current clinical practice. A systematic review was carried out for all the original studies reporting the outcomes of pre-pectoral implant breast reconstruction with Braxon® through MEDLINE and CINAHL databases. Studies were selected and analyzed based on their level of evidence, inclusion and exclusion criteria for pre-pectoral implant breast reconstruction, and outcomes in terms of complication rates and cosmesis. Six studies (742 breast reconstructions in 600 patients) were identified for the review. All of the studies were level IV evidence case series, reporting outcomes for at least three months post-operative follow-up. All except one study mentioned patient selection criteria based on Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) and British Association of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS) guidelines. Pooled complication rates showed that total 209 (28.2%) breast reconstructions had some form of complication; major complication rate of 98 (13.2%), return to theater 90 (12.1%), implant loss 48 (6.5%), minor complications 111 (15%), seroma 74 (10%), hematoma 29 (3.9%), Red breast syndrome 38 (5.1%), infection 26 (3.5%), necrosis 26 (3.5%), and wound dehiscence 24(3.2%). The short-term pooled complication rates of pre-pectoral implant breast reconstruction with Braxon® are low and comparable with those of the sub-pectoral technique. Although preliminary data are promising; however, the long-term outcomes are yet to be analyzed in future studies.
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.