ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Immediate Autologous Fat Transfer into the Breast for Volume Restoration After Implant Removal.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. 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.
- Response to Comments on "Immediate Autologous Fat Transfer into the Breast for Volume Restoration After Implant Removal".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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutologous fat transfer to the breast is utilized for various clinical indications, including breast augmentation, reconstruction, and correction of asymmetries and deformities. This study presents the outcomes of patients who underwent simultaneous volume restoration through fat transfer following breast implant removal. PATIENTS AND
methodsThirty-eight patients received immediate fat transfer to the breast after their implants were removed. The participants were categorized into three groups based on the type of incision used for implant removal: inframammary fold, periareolar, and mastopexy incisions. The study aimed to compare patients' ages, satisfaction levels, complication rates, and follow-up durations among the different groups.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 40.94 ± 8.73 years (range 24-61 years), and the mean follow-up period was 24.60 ± 17.10 months (range 3-60 months). The average volume of the implants was 318.8 cc (175-480 cc). Seventy-six breasts (38 patients bilaterally) underwent fat grafting, with a mean fat graft volume of 222.8 cc (SD 63.25; range 80-350 cc; median: 200 cc). Fourteen patients reported no complications. The periareolar incision group was excluded from statistical analysis due to a small sample size (n = 3). Patient satisfaction was notably higher in the mastopexy incision group than in those who underwent the inframammary fold incision (p = 0.037; p < 0.05). No significant differences in complication rates were observed between the groups.
conclusionsAutologous fat transfer represents a safe and effective method for achieving volume restoration following implant removal, with high patient satisfaction regarding breast shape and volume restoration. 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
40877599What 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.