ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
A Long-Term Single-Center Study: Motivations and Strategies in Implant Management for Breast Augmentation Revision Surgery.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07765953 (Thirteen-Year Trends in Primary Aesthetic Breast Augmentation, Implant Replacement, and Explantation), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Thirteen-Year Trends in Primary Aesthetic Breast Augmentation, Implant Replacement, and Explantation: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRevision surgery after breast augmentation is performed for various reasons. Understanding the causes and patients' attitudes toward implant management (removal or replacement) is critical for improving outcomes.
methodsA retrospective review of medical records from 2015 to 2023 was conducted, categorizing patients by the reasons for revision surgery and implant management approach. Demographic information, implant duration, and postoperative satisfaction were collected, followed by statistical analysis of trends and outcomes.
resultsA total of 133 patients (mean age 43.1) were included: 93 in the medical, 32 in the aesthetic, and 8 in the psychological groups. Of these, 94 opted for implant removal, and 39 chose replacement. Reasons for revision did not significantly influence implant management decisions. No significant differences were found in age, implant duration, or BMI across groups, whether categorized by reason for revision surgery or implant management. Common issues in the medical group included capsular contracture and implant rupture, while the aesthetic group cited shape dissatisfaction. Over 80% of patients reported high satisfaction with post-revision outcomes.
conclusionsImplant management decisions were not significantly affected by revision reasons or demographic factors. While medical complications primarily drive revision surgery, many patients seek surgery for subjective reasons. These findings highlight the need for comprehensive patient education, psychological support, and personalized surgical planning, with both implant removal and replacement achieving high satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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
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.