Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41040416›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

Biomimetic optimization of silicone breast implant integration: insights into wound healing and the foreign body response.

Kevin Dzobo, Traci A Wilgus, Vanessa Zamora Mora, Audry Zoncsich, Roberto de Mezerville, Nonhlanhla Khumalo, Ardeshir Bayat

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kevin DzoboMedical Research Council-SA Wound Healing Unit, Hair and Skin Research Laboratory, Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Traci A WilgusDepartment of Pathology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Centre, Columbus, OH, United States.
Vanessa Zamora MoraEstablishment Labs Holdings, Alajuela, Costa Rica.
Audry ZoncsichEstablishment Labs Holdings, Alajuela, Costa Rica.
Roberto de MezervilleEstablishment Labs Holdings, Alajuela, Costa Rica.
Nonhlanhla KhumaloMedical Research Council-SA Wound Healing Unit, Hair and Skin Research Laboratory, Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Ardeshir BayatMedical Research Council-SA Wound Healing Unit, Hair and Skin Research Laboratory, Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast augmentation is the most prevalent aesthetic surgical procedure worldwide. While silicone breast implants have evolved in terms of safety and biocompatibility, they inevitably trigger a foreign body response (FBR). This complex process can lead to fibrous encapsulation, capsular contracture, and other complications, often necessitating invasive revision surgeries. This review comprehensively analyzes the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying FBR, emphasizing the crucial role of implant surface properties. We demonstrate how these properties, including topography, hydrophobicity, and charge, govern the initial protein adsorption patterns, effectively establishing a "molecular fingerprint" that dictates subsequent cellular interactions. This, in turn, orchestrates immune cell activation, notably macrophages, which exhibit plasticity in their polarization into pro-inflammatory (M1) and pro-fibrotic (M2) phenotypes. The balance between these phenotypes influences the extent of fibrosis and capsular contracture. We explored the five distinct phases of FBR: protein adsorption, acute inflammation, chronic inflammation, foreign body giant cell (FBGC) formation, and encapsulation. The impact of implant surface properties on each phase was elucidated, highlighting the dynamic interplay between macrophages, lymphocytes, and matrix. The phenomenon of "frustrated phagocytosis," where macrophages fail to engulf the implant, leading to FBGC formation and chronic inflammation, is also examined. Finally, we explore promising strategies to modulate FBR and enhance implant biocompatibility, including biomimetic coatings, the use of decellularized matrices, and therapies aimed at disrupting specific molecular pathways involved in fibrosis. This review provides insights into the development of next-generation implants that can harmoniously integrate with the body, minimizing FBR and ensuring long-term clinical success.

Indexed as

extracellular matrixfibrosisforeign body responseinflammationprotein adsorptionsilicone implantwound healing

Identifiers

PMID41040416
PMCPMC12484225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.