ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Comparative Study Between Breast Implants and Adipose Tissue Autograft in Primary Aesthetic Breast Augmentation.
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 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.
- Mapping the Research Landscape of Autologous Fat Grafting in Breast Augmentation.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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast augmentation is the most common cosmetic surgery worldwide. Despite recent approval for aesthetic use, adipose tissue autografting remains underutilized compared to breast implants, the standard for hypoplasia correction.
objectivesThis study aims to compare patient satisfaction and quality of life following breast augmentation with implants or lipofilling, using the BREAST-Q questionnaire.
methodsFrom July 2017 to 2022, patients from our Plastic, Reconstructive, and Aesthetic Surgery Department who underwent breast augmentation with implants or lipofillin were included. The primary endpoint was patient satisfaction and quality of life, assessed using the BREAST-Q questionnaire at least six months postoperatively.
resultsAmong 119 patients (87 implants, 32 lipofilling), BREAST-Q scores showed no significant difference in breast satisfaction (71/100 vs. 69/100). Psychosocial and sexual well-being scores were similar between groups, while physical well-being was higher in the lipofilling group (96/100 vs. 87/100). Major complications occurred in 3.4% of the implant group, whereas none were observed in the lipofilling group.
conclusionAdipose tissue autografting is an effective technique, providing comparable patient satisfaction to breast implants while offering better physical well-being. It is a viable alternative to implants, particularly for patients seeking moderate breast augmentation or avoiding foreign materials, provided they have sufficient fat reserves. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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
40456993What 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.