ArticleMedicine2025
Current status of an implant-based augmentation mammaplasty in Korean women: Implications for risk management and social sustainability of breast implant industry in the context of the first Korean case of a medical device fraud.
Article in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stakeholders in the breast implant industry in Korea have recently experienced a crisis from breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma and the first Korean case of a medical device fraud. We compared the short-term safety between the microtextured devices that are commercially available after the occurrence of breast implant crisis in Korea. The current study was conducted in a cohort of Korean women who had received an implant-based augmentation mammaplasty for aesthetic purposes between November 14, 2020 and October 13, 2022. We considered risk factors of complications in analyzing the safety of devices for the current study. A total of 801 Korean women (n = 801) were finally assessed. Incidences of capsular contracture were 1.79% (3/168), 3.64% (21/577), 8.11% (3/37), and 10.53% (2/19) in the patients receiving Motiva Ergonomix, Sebbin Sublimity, Sebbin Integrity, and Eurosilicone Round Collection, respectively. These differences reached statistical significance (P < .05). There were 2 women with rupture after receiving Sebbin Sublimity, although there were no cases of rupture in association with other brands of breast implants. Overall capsular contracture-free survival was estimated at 681.470 ± 8.314 (95% confidence interval [CI] 665.174-697.766) days. By breast implants, it was 708.899 ± 8.595 (95% CI 692.053-725.745), 599.327 ± 6.607 (95% CI 586.378-612.277), 584.941 ± 22.965 (95% CI 539.931-629.952), and 572.492 ± 37.374 (95% CI 499.240-645.745) days in the patients receiving Motiva Ergonomix, Sebbin Sublimity, Sebbin Integrity, and Eurosilicone Round Collection, respectively, in the increasing order. In conclusion, our results indicate that Motiva Ergonomix Round SilkSurface is currently a relatively safer device as compared with others in the context of the first Korean case of a medical device fraud. The breast implant industry in Korea should be aware of the importance of the social sustainability in manufacturing a device.
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.