ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Breast Augmentation with Inferior Muscular Support: The Indication, Technique Evolution, and Outcomes.
Review in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Smooth implants, favored for their lower risk of rupture and BIA-ALCL, encounter stability challenges in preventing implant displacement and bottoming out. Therefore, a stronger support of the lower pole is necessary to immobilize the implant. Various techniques, which involve manipulating the pectoralis major (PM) muscle, serratus anterior muscle (SAM), external abdominal oblique muscle (EOAM), and their fascia to create a muscle-fascia pocket, have emerged as strategies to ensure implant coverage and improve stability. In this review, we redefine and categorize these surgical approaches into two types: mono-muscular flap (MMF) and bi-muscular flap (BMF). These advancements reflect evolving trends and principles in breast augmentation, emphasizing the importance of both implant coverage and stability. Clinical evidence suggests that techniques with lower-pole support are particularly beneficial for patients at high risk of implant displacement or ptosis, as well as those undergoing revision surgeries. Further refinement of techniques that compromise the conflict between muscle support and release should be of greater concern.Level of Evidence IV 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
41269255What 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.