ArticleAesthetic surgery journal2025
The BREAST-Q Implant Surveillance Module (BREAST-Q IS) As a Predictor of Breast Implant Revisional Surgery.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal, 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.
- Skin-Reducing Mastectomy and Implant Reconstruction: Long-Term Surgical, Oncological, and Patient-Reported Outcomes.ANZ journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most-cited articles on tissue expander use in breast reconstruction: insights from CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Bibliometrix.Gland 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Australian Breast Device Registry (ABDR) records breast implant surgeries Australia-wide. In addition to clinical data, the ABDR has collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to better understand patient outcomes following implant surgery.
objectivesOur objective was to assess the association between postoperative PROMs and revisional surgery due to complications for reconstructive and cosmetic breast implant patients.
methodsA cohort study design was performed. All primary breast augmentation and breast reconstruction implant insertion procedures with 2 years of follow-up after PROM response, and with at least 1 PROM completed between October 30, 2017, and May 16, 2021, registered with the ABDR were identified. The primary outcome investigated was complications requiring revision at 2 years post PROM completion. Binary logistic regression models were applied to assess the predictive ability of PROMs.
resultsA total of 5321 reconstructive procedures and 25,777 cosmetic breast procedures were followed. Multivariate regression for the reconstructive cohort showed that 3 PROM variables, feel, rippling, and tightness, predicted revision due to complications within 2 years of PROM response (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90, P = .004; OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57-0.87, P < .001; and OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93, P = .003, respectively). Multivariate regression for the cosmetic cohort showed that 3 PROM variables, look, rippling, and tightness, predicted revision due to complications within 2 years of PROM response (OR 0.51, CI 0.42-0.63, P < .001; OR 0.78, CI 0.63-0.95, P = .014; and OR 0.79, CI 0.67-0.94, P = .006, respectively).
conclusionsPostoperative PROMs were significantly associated with revisional surgery due to complications. PROMs may be employed to predict the likelihood of complications and revision following breast implant surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 (THERAPEUTIC):
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.