ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
Cadaveric Biomechanical Comparison of Prepectoral and Submuscular Implant-based Breast Reconstruction.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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.
- Unveiling Upper-Limb Dysfunction Early After Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Insights from a Retrospective Cohort Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decreased postoperative pain and functional impact have been associated with prepectoral breast implant placement versus submuscular placement; yet no mechanical analyses have quantified this difference. Using 1 postmortem human subject, a 3-dimensional biomechanical tracking system was used to determine the impact of pocket placement on shoulder girdle dynamics for submuscular acellular dermal matrix (ADM)-assisted and prepectoral implants. Smooth silicone breast implants were placed bilaterally-one in the prepectoral plane with anterior ADM coverage and the other in the submuscular ADM-assisted plane. Using tracking nodes at the sternum, clavicles, scapulae, and humeri, each shoulder was tested through serial standardized trials of extension, flexion, lateral extension/flexion, oblique extension/flexion, and abduction using manual manipulations of the shoulder and a counter-weight apparatus before and after implant placement. Bone kinematics (bony displacement and rotation) and kinetics (joint force and moment) were recorded. To achieve equal shoulder extension and flexion maneuvers, submuscular placement was associated with increased scapular, humeral, and clavicular displacement as well as increased scapular and humeral rotation compared with preoperative measurements, whereas prepectoral placement showed no difference. Increased scapular and clavicular rotation with extension and decreased rotation with abduction were noted with both pockets. This cadaveric biomechanical model shows that submuscular implant placement is associated with compensatory increases in bony displacements and rotation required to complete standardized movements consistent with activities of daily living. Further replication of this protocol with varying cadaveric body types and implant sizes would generate predicted postoperative shoulder movement models for implant-based breast reconstruction in different pocket locations.
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.